The oral and public trial for the so-called “Wilde Massacre”an emblematic case of “easy trigger” occurred in 1994, in which four innocent people were murdered by troops who mistook them for criminals in that Buenos Aires town, begins this Monday in the Courts of Lomas de Zamora and the widow of one of the victims demanded that it be a “fair” debate and that all the defendants be given “life” imprisonment.
The debate takes place at said venue located at Presidente Perón 2463 -former Camino Negro- and will be in charge of the Oral Criminal Court (TOC) 3, made up of judges Marcelo Hugo Dellature, Luis Miguel Gabián and Claudio Fernández.
After the opening arguments of the parties, the first witnesses will be given, who will be Raquel Gazzanego and Patricia Corbo, widows of Edgardo Cicutin and Norberto Corbo, respectively; Claudio Díaz, the only survivor of the massacre; and the policemen who carried out the initial actions on the scene.
The trial begins almost a year after the preliminary hearing, in which the prosecutor who was in charge of the accusation, Viviana Simón; the lawyers of the four victims and the private and official defenders of the nine defendants detailed the procedure for presenting evidence.
The defendants who come to trial are former commissioners Roberto Mantel and Eduardo Gómez, former officers Osvaldo Lorenzón, former lieutenants Marciano González and Pablo Dudek, former officers Julio Gatto and Marcelo Valenga, and former Corporal Marcos Rodríguez, all released.
On the other hand, former lieutenant Marciano González, who suffered a stroke a little over a year ago, is also charged and a medical report has yet to be delivered to indicate whether or not he is fit to stand trial, judicial sources informed Télam. .
Meanwhile, former Corporal Rodríguez remained a fugitive for 20 years and after being arrested in 2014 in the province of Córdoba after an investigation by the Airport Security Police (PSA), he was under house arrest and was released last March.
In the debate, which was postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic, the defendants will have to answer for the crimes of quadruple simple homicide and simple attempted homicide, since one of the victims (Díaz) survived.
Judicial sources informed Télam that TOC 3 set two weeks of hearings, to be held from Monday to Friday, in a debate in which around 200 witnesses are expected to testify.
Gazzanego, widow of the book seller Cicutin, spoke with Télam and pointed out that she hopes that “it will be a fair trial, as a first step,” and that her “wish is that they all be given life sentences.”
“Bearing in mind that they would not only be sentenced for the death of Edgardo, but also for the death of Norberto Corbo (the taxi driver) and even for the death of (Enrique) Bielsa and (Claudio) Mendoza, the occupants of the car. Since they (the defendants) were part of the criminal gang that was formed there within the Lanús Brigade,” the woman assured.
As for the delay that has elapsed to carry out the trial, Raquel said that she is “convinced that everything comes sooner or later” and that “justice comes, the truth, always sooner or later, comes out in the light, we have to wait, nothing more”.
On the other hand, he highlighted “the work of Judge Gabriel Vitale, having been able to grab the hot potato after the Supreme Court of Justice ordered a new investigation of the case.”
In that sense, she added that by order of Vitale the capture of the last detainee was achieved in 2014 in Córdoba, after she discovered that he had changed his address from Tigre by reviewing “the electoral rolls every time there was a vote.”
“I want this to come to light, for this to end and for this to end with fair justice,” Raquel concluded.
The fact
The “Wilde Massacre” occurred on January 10, 1994 and its victims were the Corbo taxi driver and his passengers, Mendoza and Bielsa, who were traveling aboard a Peugeot 505, and the book seller Cicutin, who was traveling in a Dodge 1500, led by Díaz, the only one who survived the attack.
The five were shot at by members of the Lanús Investigation Brigade who apparently mistook them for criminals and shot them nearly 200 times.
All the former officers face charges for the crimes of “quadruple simple homicide and a simple attempted homicide”, for the only victim of the attack who survived.
According to expert reports, the vehicles involved and the victims received some 200 impacts from 9-millimeter caliber bullets fired from pistols and at least one Uzi submachine gun.
In principle, the policemen who intervened in the event were arrested, although the Chamber of Appeals and Guarantees dismissed them and released them.
In addition to those who are now going to trial, Commissioner César Córdoba, Carlos Saladino and Hugo Reyes were charged (already deceased), all members of the brigade whose deputy chief was the then Commissioner and current lawyer Juan José Ribelli, prosecuted and later acquitted by the attack on the AMIA and who was not in the country when the event occurred.
After appeals from relatives of the victims, in 2003 and 2007 they were again dismissed for the same measure.
However, the case continued its course until the Supreme Court of Justice of Buenos Aires, which in 2013 ordered to reopen the file and annul the dismissals, stating that “Even if it were considered that the investigated quadruple homicide does not constitute a crime against humanity, there is no doubt that it did constitute a very serious violation of human rights.”
The lawyer Ciro Annicchiarico, representative of Gazzanego and his two sons, explained to Télam that the delay in carrying out the trial occurred because, according to the new criminal code, Judge Vitale had to “run a transfer to the parties.” to offer “proof”.
“From then on (the defenders of the accused) began to file appeals for annulment, prescription, and appeal before the Court, before the Cassation Chamber, before the National Court, they all went wrong and they lost them, because They said: ‘No, gentlemen, it is a serious violation of human rights, the investigation is finished, there must be a trial,’” the lawyer concluded.
