The Court accepted the defense's appeal and annulled the prosecution against the former officers. According to the ruling, the basic crime for which they were accused would not be proven.
A new setback had the indictment that seeks to determine criminal responsibilities in the alleged abduction of Ricardo Harex González, a 17-year-old boy who lost track of him in 2001.
Yesterday Tuesday, the Court of Appeals accepted the appeal filed by the defense of Máximo Sánchez Márquez and Anwar Kharufeh Jadue, two retired officers of the Carabineros who were accused of covering up a crime of child abduction.
In a unanimous decision, the Court considered that the underlying crime was not justified, therefore it is not possible to attribute responsibility to the ex-policemen.
Now, the prosecution regarding both concludes, pending whether other parties involved in the case decide to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The former officers were prosecuted along with two other police officers and three Salesian priests –including ex-bishop Bernardo Basstres– on October 15.
The former visiting minister Marta Jimena Pinto placed preventive detention on all of them, but later the Court of Appeals ordered their release upon payment of a 200,000-peso bail.
A new setback occurred on October 26, when the highest Magellan court accepted two amparo appeals and annulled the prosecution against Bastres and the priest Leonardo Santibáñez.
On that occasion, the Court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to justify the existence of the underlying crime (the abduction of the adolescent Ricardo Harex), nor the participation attributed to the protected persons.
The annulment of the prosecution of Bastres was confirmed by the criminal chamber of the Supreme Court on November 8.
Now the Court of Appeals has ruled on the situation of Kharufeh and Sánchez. The courtroom made up of minister Caroline Turner, minister Claudio Jara and member lawyer Carmen González accepted the defense appeal and revoked the prosecution against the troops.
The The ruling indicates that “the truth is that in no case is the existence of the base crime sufficiently justified (…) considering also that the defendants were never interrogated as defendants, that is, exhorted to tell the truth, enough reasons for them necessarily, for the sake of out of respect for the procedural rules that govern us, the challenged resolution must be revoked.”