Diario Extra – ‘Let’s exorcise the creature,’ said a lawyer about the Prosecutor’s Office

As liars and an entity that makes false accusations, this is how the defense of the former prosecutor Berenice Smith defined the actions of the Public Ministry in the debate that takes place over the alleged crime of influence peddling.
This is a trial in which Smith is charged along with the former magistrate and former deputy chief of the Prosecutor’s Office, Celso Gamboa, and Josefino Mayor Johnny Araya.
During the two sessions this Friday, the lawyer Francisco Dall’Anese, Smith’s civil defender, said that the Public Ministry set up a circus in the trial and indicated that all Costa Ricans are at risk with the actions they have taken.
“Here a line was crossed that I thought would never be seen to pass. A prosecutor’s office bringing its officials to lie, ”he said.
He requested a testimony of pieces for the Public Ministry officials Natalia Rojas, prosecutor, Tatiana Vargas, press officer, and Juan Carlos Cubillo, prosecutor.
Even the litigant lashed out at the argument of the prosecutor Melissa Quirós, who in the conclusions pointed out that what the Constitutional Chamber said should not be followed because it was against the law.
Given this, Dall’Anese argued that when Room IV issues a criterion it must be followed by all people and it was questioned that “it is not true that Room IV is above the Public Ministry.”
“Let us exorcise the creature, judges. Let’s not let those demons, ghosts that have been thrown around the room, possess their bodies and their minds, we have to exorcise those lies.
The Constitutional Chamber is above the Public Ministry and neither Mrs. Emilia can come to tell us that what the Chamber said does not apply, ”said the lawyer about the prosecutorial action.
Dall’Anese, who was attorney general, noted that current prosecutors have no knowledge of what an influence is because neither the Third Chamber nor the courts have defined it.
“Doña Berenice told me the other day: ‘I’m asking the Virgin of the Angels’ and I said:’ No, no, shut up. Do not tell the prosecutors, it is possible that they accuse you of influence peddling, you do not see that you do not know what an influence is, ‘”he added.
He alleged that the prosecutor Natalia Rojas and the press officer Tatiana Vargas told the court lies. In the case of the prosecutor regarding the handling of documents and false reports, she assures that she issued.
Regarding Vargas, he indicated that he did not exchange emails with the Probity Prosecutor’s Office that demonstrate that he made inquiries about the cases of the mayoral candidates.
Another point that the litigant pointed out was that former prosecutor Jorge Chavarría and Justo Pastor López were not called as witnesses to the process, despite the fact that they were widely mentioned in the process.
Dall’Anese even showed the court a DIARIO EXTRA publication titled “Investigating Illegal Appointments to Prosecutors”, prepared on February 13, 2021.
From that publication, he highlighted a quotation mark that indicates “within the cases 20-000207-1218-PE and 20-000235-1218-PE there are investigations for the alleged crimes of illegal appointments and illicit enrichment, respectively. This office does not communicate the identity of the investigated persons until the investigative statement has been taken from them ”.
Regarding this response issued by the Probity Prosecutor’s Office to El Diario del Pueblo, the lawyer indicated that “if the order to tell Johnny Araya ‘you are not accused, you are denounced’ had been true, what is the abuse if it had not been inquired? But worst of all, they couldn’t even divulge the name.
It will be that in these secret protocols that nobody knows, or what it says here is true, that information is never given when the accused has not been investigated or there is an abuse, a total violation of article 295 of the Criminal Procedure Code by Tatiana Vargas ”.
After presenting these arguments, the lawyer requested that the civil lawsuit imposed by the Attorney General’s Office, which amounts to ¢ 15 million in Smith’s case, be declared irrelevant.
For his part, the lawyer Federico Campos, who exercises the criminal defense of the former prosecutor, supported in his statement what his co-defender said and added that they do not believe what the witness Natalia Rojas said about feeling pressure after the alleged order of Smith and Gamboa, because in the trial they described Rojas as a woman with a strong personality and a difficult character, added to her extensive experience.
He added that the representatives of the Public Ministry in the debate, Melissa Quirós and Juan Pablo Miranda, “blew it with the undue advantage”, as he pointed out that fraud was not mentioned in the accusation and that asking for a 5-year sentence is disproportionate.
“We want to request the acquittal of Berenice Smith Bonilla for certainty of innocence. Here there is no crime that should be charged at any time, it cannot be acquitted by reasonable doubt if the facts are atypical.
If the accusation does not even contain fraud, how can defendants be acquitted for reasonable doubt where there is not even mention of the subjective element of the criminal type, a requirement, an obligation of all accusations? It has to be acquitted by certainty ”, declared Campos.