Justice acquitted a police colonel accused of falsifying an instrument public, obstruction of the investigation and illegal detention of a subordinate, who was charged with driving while intoxicated with the result of damage, which was later ruled out.
The Oral Criminal Court of Valdivia – in the Los Ríos region – acquitted a police colonel, accused for the crimes of falsifying a public instrument, obstructing the investigation and illegal detention of a subordinate.
The facts date back to August 6, 2017, when the officer worked as a commissioner of the First Police Station of Valdivia with the rank of major and took a procedure after a vehicle crash on Arturo Prat avenue, where a second sergeant was involved, who was on a day off.
Subaltern was accused of driving while intoxicated
In the police report issued after the accident, it was reported that the sergeant was driving the vehicle, which meant that it was formalized and later dismissed for the crime of driving while intoxicated with the result of damage, since it was verified that he was going as a copilito. In addition, his license was suspended.
For the preparation of that part, the Prosecutor’s Office accused him of the crimes of falsification of a public instrument, obstruction of the investigation and illegal detention against the subordinate.
In view of the evidence presented in a case in which the State Defense Council was part of, the Court considered that although there could have been an impulsive action by the then police officer, not very rigorous and even careless in his hierarchical role, It is not enough to affirm the existence of fraud in his actions, without proving the crimes charged.
The prosecutor Álvaro Pérez confirmed the determination of the Court, adding that in the coming days they will be known in detail the court’s arguments to acquit the colonel.
Intent was ruled out in the current colonel’s case
In the verdict establishes that after the commissioner spoke with the sergeant, he announced in the presence of other officials that he was the driver of the vehicle, immediately activating the rigorous procedure in order to determine his degree of intemperance when perceiving his hierarchical superior his evident alcoholic breath.
“According to the appreciation of these magistrates, there are no indications to consider that there was fraud in the actions of the accused, much less an effort to harm the sergeant , not noticing any reason to act falsely with the intention of harming him, and arguments about possible generic hatefulness between different ranks within the Carabineros institution must be discarded, certainly not proven with respect to the two officials involved in this case ”, reads in the ruling.
They add that “since there is no intent, nor residual culpable figures, and having ruled out the occurrence of the basic fact that serves as a matrix for all the unjust accused, the Court maintains that there is one more doubt than reasonable and that all charges must be dismissed”.
Regarding the crime of falsifying a public instrument, it is also estimated that the evidence provided was not suitable as the respective police report had not been directly incorporated.
They complement that although it was proven that the sergeant was not driving the vehicle in question, “this irrefutable conclusion only arises ex post, therefore, the defendant cannot be required to conduct in accordance with said certainty”.
“The preliminary evidence was sufficiently indicative at that point in the investigation, that is, during the first police proceedings, that the sergeant was most likely driving, since it was his car , was the only person who was in the place when the first officers of the Carabineros arrived, he was consuming alcohol and lying on the public road and, in addition, with his feet inside the vehicle on the driver’s seat ”, it is explained in the resolution.
The reading of the sentence was set for December 1st. The persecutor affirmed that they will analyze the ruling carefully to review whether or not it is appropriate to exercise the legal right to file an appeal for annulment.