[ad_1]
With great fanfare, since last Saturday Vicky Dávila announced on her twitter that the following day Sunday Semana Noticias would reveal an “explosive scoop” on the star witness of the Álvaro Uribe case, Juan Guillermo Monsalve.
#LaFincaDeMonsalve so they arm us smear campaigns and attack us, we continue to search for the truth https://t.co/joz3nNTeKF connect now ..
– Vicky Dávila (@VickyDavilaH) September 7, 2020
The story turned out to be that of the property of the La Veranera farm, belonging to relatives of the former paramilitary who has ensured that the former president -preventively detained for procedural fraud and bribery- allegedly sponsored the creation of the Metro block of the AUC and then deployed an operation to deal with that the witness changed that version and said that he had given the statement because the Polo senator Iván Cepeda had offered him benefits.
Semana suggests that ownership of that land may have had to do with Monsalve’s testimony, since one of its parts was acquired in 2018, the year in which what the former paramilitary said “became a determining factor in the process he was leading against the Former President of the Supreme Court ”.
Almost at the same time, also on Sunday, Noticias Uno reported the news of the same farm, but in a sense opposite to that of Semana. Rather, ruling out that the acquisition of the property had something to do with what Monsalve said, since the witness spoke against Uribe since 2011, five years before the purchase.
#NewsOne| The history of the farm attributed to Juan Guillermo Monsalve, the star witness of the Uribe Process pic.twitter.com/orFsmIuuHM
– News One (@NoticiasUno) September 7, 2020
We review each report and find that, although they agree on several issues and diverge on others, both omit or make more emphasis on some particular data to support their respective theses. These are:
The cost of the farm
The two reports – the Semana one by the journalist Salud Hernández, who visited the property; and that of Noticias Uno, presented by Ignacio Gómez- coincide in the basic: they refer to the same farm, called La Veranera, of 20 hectares in total, which is located in an area known as Apia, in Risaralda.
Also in that the property was acquired in two pieces: one in September 2011 for 27 million pesos in a purchase made by Deyanira Gómez (ex-wife and mother of Monsalve’s son) and the other, in July 2018 for another 27 million. in a purchase in the name of Monsalve’s mother (Luz Marina Pineda Monsalve) for a total of 54 million pesos.
So far there are coincidences.
In addition to the cadastral value, Semana found out – and emphasized – the commercial value of the farm. They assure that it is 380 million pesos, according to inquiries made with the people who live in the area. And also that the witness’s father, Óscar Monsalve, who lives there and spoke to them but did not want to go on camera, is selling it for 460 million.
Semana relates that heritage and those values with the alleged humanitarian aid that would have been given to Monsalve Iván Cepeda, who is a victim in the Uribe trial, accepting the arguments made public by the lawyer of former president Jaime Lombana, according to which the Senator gave 12.9 million pesos to relatives of Monsalve through the Committee for Solidarity with Political Prisoners.
However, according to El Tiempo, the Supreme Court rejected that there was any irregularity there because the NGO provided evidence that supported the destination of that money.
The magazine pointed out promptly: “If Juan Guillermo Monsalve was a man of limited economic resources and Senator Iván Cepeda – the main beneficiary of his statements against Uribe – gave him“ humanitarian aid ”, the question that arises is where did his mother Luz Marina get from the 27 million pesos to buy the land that, moreover, would have a higher value.
Noticias Uno, for its part, makes no reference to the commercial value of the farm.
Where did the silver come from to buy it
Semana wonders where Monsalve’s mother could have gotten 27 million pesos to buy a piece of land that, according to the media, is commercially worth much more. They do not give the answer, but they do insinuate without presenting evidence that it could have had to do with Iván Cepeda’s efforts.
Noticias Uno presents the screenshot of a succession document to ensure that Deyanira Gómez (mother of Monsalve’s son) received 40 million in an inheritance after the death of his parents and with that he bought a piece of the property. On the remaining 27 million, which compromise the second purchase, the one made by the witness’s mother, the newscast does not refer to the origin. He says it was acquired by a “farmer dedicated to growing coffee.”
Home
Semana shows a large white house with wooden finishes that has been renovated in recent years and about which Salud Hernández assures that “it does not look like that of a traditional peasant”, as in his opinion is the image of Monsalve’s father, who is who lives there. In the images the journalist appears.
Noticias Uno, for its part, shows a different construction: a traditional peasant house that would have been built in 1956, according to the voice-over of the report. It is a support shot, no journalist or person appears.
The date of Monsalve’s testimony
The two media reported that the farm was bought in two moments: one property in 2016 and the other in 2018. Semana emphasizes the second purchase, which is the one that Monsalve’s mother makes, ensuring that that year, in February, the former paramilitary He testified against Uribe, assuring that emissaries sent by the former president were pressuring him to change his testimony about the alleged relations with paramilitaries, and in July the payment of that piece of property was made.
The magazine does not mention anywhere in its report that the first time that Juan Guillermo Monsalve spoke of Álvaro Uribe’s alleged relationship with the creation of paramilitary groups was in 2011 and that at that time there were still five years to go before the purchase of the first batch of the farm.
Noticias Uno, for its part, rules out that there is a relationship between Monsalve’s testimony and the acquisition of the property, highlighting in its report that the star witness declared for the first time in 2011 and, five years later, in 2016, the purchase was made. of the first piece of land.
The newscast did not mention at any time in the report in question that, in any case, both the acquisition of the second lot and the second declaration of Monsalve were made in the same year 2018 (which was the emphasis that Semana gave it).
[ad_2]
