[ad_1]
Lawyer Isaías Rodríguez Gutiérrez, who represents Pablo Salazar and Hernando Villalba, two of the eight policemen who were convicted of the so-called Mondoñedo massacre, stated that there are no “indications” that allow to conclude that the six students murdered in said massacre had participated in the murder of Álvaro Gómez Hurtado.
In an interview with EL TIEMPO, the lawyer refers to the investigation into the death of the six people identified as being part of the Antonio Nariño Urban Network of the Farc (RUAN).
The ex-combatants announced that they will recognize in the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, JEP, their responsibility in the assassination in which today’s senator Julián Gallo, ‘Carlos Antonio Lozada’, would have been key.
Gómez Hurtado was assassinated in Bogotá on November 5, 1995. The Mondoñedo massacre was perpetrated between September 6 and 7, 1996.
(You may be interested: This was the Mondoñedo massacre, key to the crime of Álvaro Gómez)
Who are your clients?
I represent Pablo Salazar and Hernando Villalba, who at the time of the events were first corporals of the National Police.
How has the process developed?
The process has been taking place in the 8th Circuit Criminal Court, and in that instance they were convicted, despite the fact that they appealed. Later, all of those who were part of that process as defendants moved to the Special Justice for Peace, JEP.
And the JEP granted them conditional freedom, and that’s what we’re doing. In addition, they are ready to go to the Truth Commission to be able to issue each one their version.
(We suggest: On November 4 and 17, the FARC will speak at the JEP about the crime of Gómez Hurtado)
How many years were they sentenced?
28 years old. In the case of my clients, they managed to pay for five years.
How long ago did the JEP ask for a clue?
They were accepted a year ago, and we have already carried out several proceedings in that court.
(We recommend: Case Wing. Gómez: convicted of the Mondoñedo massacre asks for a clue in JEP)
With the acceptance of the Farc of having ordered the death of Gómez Hurtado, the hypothesis is made that the young people murdered in Mondoñedo – who were members of the urban militias – murdered him …
It must be assumed that the events that originated in relation to the Mondoñedo massacre were recorded on September 7, 1996, and the assassination of Dr. Álvaro Gómez was in 1995.
Although the evidence indicates that those killed in the massacre did belong to the Antonio Nariño urban network, so far there is no evidence or probative material that could indicate in that process that they were related to the crime of Gómez Hurtado.
To date, there is no evidence or probative material that could indicate in that process that they were related to the crime of Gómez Hurtado.
How did those involved in the massacre come forward?
They always pleaded not guilty.
Alluding to what?
Different situations. In some cases, such as my clients, who were not in the place, and other material probative elements that were not taken into account.
And why do they condemn them then?
At that time it was Law 600, which was an inquisitive system. They saw an opportunity in their search for their freedom by joining the JEP. There they will contribute to the truth.
(Also read: Harsh response from the Gómez family to Ernesto Samper and Horacio Serpa)
Was there anything at that time that linked the murdered youths with the assassination, did the police know?
They had no way of knowing that the dead had something to do with the assassination of Álvaro Gómez Hurtado.
Not only because of that fact, but in the whole process that was carried out there was not even a suspicion that those young people who died had a direct relationship with that crime.
(It may interest you: Jurists see no reason to remove seats from the Farc in the Álvaro Gómez case)
What are they going to tell at the JEP?
They have already been telling me about the massacre and each one will tell their truth. I do not know in a concrete way what they are going to say.
From the legal point of view – since 96 – and we are in 2020, there were a series of preclusions, procedural cessations, annulments and the testimony of a single person was what led to justice being activated again, with a judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice where it said that the testimony of the father of one of the guerrillas should be given credibility, with that it was activated and ended with a conviction.
Other news of the day:
– ‘In gender violence, ordinary justice is not superior to indigenous’
– Expanded investigation by laboratory found on former ambassador’s farm
ALICIA LILIANA MÉNDEZ
On twitter: @JusticiaET
[ad_2]
