The lawyer for the family of Yéremi Vargas, Marcos García Montes, has shown his willingness to challenge the magistrate who is in charge of the case, if he does not approve the appeals that the lawyer has presented and that are pending resolution.
This is how he positioned himself at the COPE Canarias microphones after revealing that the judge does not want to take a statement from a key witness for Montes, such as Rubén Obadía, a prisoner at the Botafuegos prison, in Algeciras, and whom Antonio Ojeda, El Rubio , would have told him key facts of the story, such as that the boy “turned blue”, in reference to the cyanosis that Yéremi suffered from, a fact that only the family knew.
Data that Obadía also narrates by telephone to Yéremi’s mother, Ithaisa Suárez, through a journalist. In that conversation, with the cell phone in hands free, Ithaisa and her husband listen to the inmate’s testimony, which narrates what Ojeda told him in prison, with key data: how he admits that “it got out of hand”, that they gave him something, the mattress that they later burned, that the boy turned blue.
According to Montes, it is a very important testimony because Rubio recognizes his presence at the place and time of the disappearance. The lawyer wants the judge to listen to him, as well as that of Iván’s mother, the minor who saw Ojeda in a white car looking at the house where the boy disappeared, and also that of the journalist who put the prisoner in contact with Ithaisa. “With this the processing of Rubio is armed.
The lawyer assures that the Provincial Court will have to say yes to this statement “because it is pure common sense. If not, we will go to the Constitutional Court or to Strasbourg and we will win in two years”. García Montes has been very critical of the judge in charge of the case. He recalled that, at the opening of the procedure, the lawyer warned that he was not qualified for the investigation.
Now, after the refusal to allow the prisoner to testify, the lawyer goes a step further and advances in COPE Canarias that, depending on the decisions made by the magistrate regarding the pending appeals, his recusal is proposed. “If I see that it is positioned against our thesis, which is the truth, I will be forced to recuse the judge,” he pointed out.
–
