Fernando Burlando published on his Twitter account a survey on the Baez Sosa case. “Based on the evidence presented during the trial and the allegations of the prosecution, complaint and defense: what do you think the judges’ sentence will be?” 63% answered “life imprisonment with treachery and premeditation”, the sentence that Burlando, together with the rest of the prosecutors, requested for the 8 rugby players accused of the murder of Fernando Báez Sosa. 30% answered “Eventual Intent: from 8 to 25 years”; 6% chose “homicide by fight: from 2 to 6 years” and 1% thought that the 8 rugby players will be released.
This publication by Burlando could be a way of influencing the court that, next February 2, must pass sentence on the rugbiers. In this way, Burlando would show that his position reflects public opinion, which would be leaning towards his opinion and not that of Hugo Tomeia lawyer for the rugby players, who argues that the correct penalty would be “murder in brawl”, with which the defendants could be released in a few years. In his statement, Tomei assured that the murder of Fernando Báez Sosa was not premeditated, and that it was “between two sides”Therefore, the sentence of “life imprisonment for treachery and premeditation” would be unfair.
Throughout the hearings, there has been more than one crossover between the two lawyers. During his plea, Tomei presented a video with a file of several of the times in which Burlando referred, in media statements, to the defendants, accusing them of “murderers”, to be “shitty, sons of bitches” that “they killed a guy”. With this, the defender of rugby players sought to exemplify how Burlando influenced the media and public opinion, vitiating, from his perspective, the information about the case and preventing its correct treatment. Far from being intimidated, Burlando asked: “Could you make it louder? Can’t you hear?”
“It hurts because he is a recognized professional and what he achieves with this is that they (the rugby players) have been locked up in tiny cells for three years,” Tomei claimed.
Also, during the hearings, Tomei had a cross with Burlando. When he was reading his statement several minutes ago, Tomei interrupted him to point out that “the law prohibits reading” the pages and requesting that he give “agility” to his intervention. “I would prefer that it be adjusted to the pleading code so that it is a little more fluid,” Tomei argued. However, the judge allowed Burlando to read the pages, after he excused himself, pointing out that it was “impossible to remember” everything the pages said. “I’m going to do the same to you, doctor,” Tomei warned Burlando. The next day, towards the end of Tomei’s argument, Tomei’s lawyer pointed out that he “forgot something important to say.” And before continuing with his argument about the case, he dropped an irony: “This of not following a line of reading…”, in reference to Burlando reading his pages.
But the confrontation between the two lawyers comes almost from the beginning. Already in February 2020, Hugo Tomei had denounced Burlando for his statements on the case, and even asked the court to investigate whether Burlando had committed the crimes of apology for crime and public intimidation for making “public expressions of risk to the lives of the defendants.” “When there are professionals, these things do not happen. We have tried to have a cordial relationship with the colleague. Beyond the fact that he defends the murderers who were the protagonists of Fernando’s death, I think we should not mix the issues,” the Báez Sosa lawyer told TN at the time.
by RN
Image gallery
