Rafecas Dismisses Amia Cover-Up Probe Against Cfk

[Rich One]

well Judge Policita has appealed Federal Judge Rafecas decision to reject Neisman's Complanint.?

 

[notebook.fix]

This wasn't just a professional hitman either. This was someone who could engineer Nisman dismissing his 10-man security detail and having a gun in his possession. No, this was not a campora-ordered hit. It was either government and/or the special services..

Agreed, I always felt this murder was backed by a sector of the k government - and obviously not something one lone hit man could carry out on his own. The reason I suspect Campora involvement is cause of one main person.... the head... Maximo - or otherwise known as 'Minimo'....I'm not saying he acted alone, someone too close to Cristina lost his nerve and sent out orders for the pros to be called in. This murder reaks of young, impulsive hotheaded and not very bright....an emotionally based knee jerk reaction from someone close to Cristina. As well as Aerolineas Argentinas, la Campora also control many government departments including gun licensing and armaments. They have their fingers in many pies...more resources at their finger tips.

 

[Jaredberryman]

It's not Rafecas' job to listen to any recordings. That would have been Nisman's job. If there had been anything valuable in those 900 hours (and everything that Nisman chose to add was pretty ho-hum), they should have been included in the criminal complaint.

Nisman's criminal complaint has no evidence that links Cristina to any coverup, and it never did. Zip. Zero. Nada. So, it's dismissed. And this forum is silent.

According to a friend of mine that is a lawyer and also a family member of Rafecas, that is not true. He was supposed to listen to those 900 hours. Furthermore, he dismissed the case and reviewed it from abroad. This by law is not supposed to be done. Rafecas has to be in Argentina to review this kind of information, but he was abroad. It stinks to high heaven. My lawyer friend thinks he was probably threatened.

 

[sesamosinsal]

According to a friend of mine that is a lawyer and also a family member of Rafecas, that is not true. He was supposed to listen to those 900 hours.

Your friend is wrong. Nisman, a federal prosecutor, would have to include all evidence for his complaint to be taken up by a judge. (And by the way, there are reportedly thousands of hours, not just 900.) A judge does not accuse people of a crime. A judge evaluates the evidence put before her/him to determine whether one has been committed according to law.

Nisman didn't present evidence in HIS complaint for that to be done. Am I saying that there isn't any evidence at all out there that may prove the government wanted to participate in a cover up? No. If it exists, it hasn't been presented. You can't prove a crime based on what you THINK might exist.

Just because Nisman's complaint was dismissed doesn't mean that Pollicita can't present a new one down the road. At any rate, Rafecas has allowed it to be reviewed.

Furthermore, he dismissed the case and reviewed it from abroad. This by law is not supposed to be done. Rafecas has to be in Argentina to review this kind of information, but he was abroad. It stinks to high heaven. My lawyer friend thinks he was probably threatened.

Based on my research, this is also false.

 

[Jaredberryman]

Your friend is wrong. Nisman, a federal prosecutor, would have to include all evidence for his complaint to be taken up by a judge. (And by the way, there are reportedly thousands of hours, not just 900.) A judge does not accuse people of a crime. A judge evaluates the evidence put before her/him to determine whether one has been committed according to law.

Nisman didn't present evidence in HIS complaint for that to be done. Am I saying that there isn't any evidence at all out there that may prove the government wanted to participate in a cover up? No. If it exists, it hasn't been presented. You can't prove a crime based on what you THINK might exist.

Just because Nisman's complaint was dismissed doesn't mean that Pollicita can't present a new one down the road. At any rate, Rafecas has allowed it to be reviewed.



Based on my research, this is also false.

She is a lawyer. That's what she said. She is part of a family of Argentine lawyers. I am simply repeating what she said. I have no idea and don't plan on doing any research.

 

[sesamosinsal]

I am simply repeating what she said. I have no idea and don't plan on doing any research.

That's what most people do. Unfortunately.

 

[sesamosinsal]

Lagomarsino's lawyer stated this morning that Nisman took half of Lagomarsino's salary:

http://ambito.com/no...a.asp?id=783102

"Dado que la doctora Arroyo Salgado nos obliga a exponer cuál era la relación económica con el doctor Nisman, lo hacemos transparentando todo. Ella llevó a una situación que no hace bien a la imagen del fiscal fallecido"

My translation: "Given that Dr. Arroyo Salgado gave us no other choice but to expose Lagomarsino's economic relationship with Dr. Nisman, we're going to come clean about everything. She created a situation that doesn't bode well for the image of the deceased prosecutor."

Looks like the parties involved are more concerned about Mr. Nisman's image than getting to the truth. Tell me, why does Nisman's image matter so much? It does seem a bit hard to believe that Argentines would rally 'round Nisman if he were just as corrupt as everyone believes the entire government to be... no?

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Only amazing how fast Rafecas dismissed the complaint considering the times of justice here.

No.
I had a ridicoulous accusation of coercion agains a federal judge in 17 cases where i just made my work as a lawyer.

I went to the interrogation and the judge dismissed the case 2 days later.

Why? To go on with a federal criminal investigation based on fake facts or abusing of law (a fake accusation) is a crime and a strong reason for a dismiss case. Regarding the crime, there is no jail but a fine and a lifetime bann to be again a public officer.

So, it is normal.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Lagomarsino's lawyer stated this morning that Nisman took half of Lagomarsino's salary:

http://ambito.com/no...a.asp?id=783102



My translation: "Given that Dr. Arroyo Salgado gave us no other choice but to expose Lagomarsino's economic relationship with Dr. Nisman, we're going to come clean about everything. She created a situation that doesn't bode well for the image of the deceased prosecutor."

Looks like the parties involved are more concerned about Mr. Nisman's image than getting to the truth. Tell me, why does Nisman's image matter so much? It does seem a bit hard to believe that Argentines would rally 'round Nisman if he were just as corrupt as everyone believes the entire government to be... no?

Nobody cares his image. She cares about the 600.000 usd, and he is blackmailing her. He mentioned his image to evade a criminal prosecution for extortion.