[ad_1]
The State Defense Council (CDE) put the magnifying glass on Anita María Pinochet, the wife of the former commander-in-chief of the Army, General (R) Juan Miguel Fuente-Alba, also known as the “Lucía chica”, compared to Lucía Hiriart, the widow of the late dictator Augusto Pinochet.
This, because the tax entity decided to expand the lawsuit for money laundering filed more than a year ago against Fuente-Alba, now his wife, a key piece in the money laundering and embezzlement machinery in which the former was involved. military chief.
According to the CDE, “according to the antecedents present in the criminal investigation, it is undoubtedly established that the defendant, together with her spouse, had hidden, concealed and used money from reserved expenses” with full knowledge of their illicit origin ” . The agency makes said accusation on the basis of reports, antecedents and statements of witnesses, as well as the defendant herself, contained in the investigation and that are consigned in detail in the complaint.
In the opinion of the CDE, an “eventual concealment of assets or“ own laundering ”is configured, with the purpose of hiding or disguising“ the nature, origin, location, ownership or control of money and / or illegally obtained assets ”; as well as “introducing assets of illicit origin into the economy, giving them the appearance of legality by making use of legal activities”.
In the investigation led by Minister Romy Rutherford in military justice, Fuente-Alba has already been prosecuted for embezzlement of $ 3.5 billion from reserved expenses, the delivery of false statements and the use of an institutional plane for personal trips to the exclusive resort of Puerto Velero. .
Likewise, the retired uniformed chief is formalized by the Eastern Metropolitan Prosecutor’s Office before the ordinary courts for the crime of money laundering. Although the marital partnership regime would exonerate her as the author of the crimes under investigation, she could in any case be formalized as an accomplice.
According to the CDE, the criminal action maintains that “with the assets derived from the crimes of embezzlement of public funds perpetrated by her spouse, the accused carried out various operations -material, financial and legal-, which as a whole were intended to disguise the illicit origin of the goods obtained ”, materializing“ two of the stages that are internationally distinguished for this crime, such as ‘placement’ and ‘stratification’ or ‘overshadowing’ ”.
[ad_2]
