Attack on Cristina Kirchner: a mysterious smile, insults between two accusers and the open doors of Sabbag’s confession

Fernando Sabag Montiel She was wearing the same shoes she wore on the day she tried out, September 1, 2022. kill cristina kirchner. He waited for photo reporters and cameramen to pass by, to whom he showed the message, “They have kidnapped me.” But after nearly a year and a half as an isolated prisoner – and without his clothes, he said – and a series of letters that no one noticed and did not disclose, he was able to find the truth. Infobae, The young Brazilian has not hesitated to take the stand and demand the prominence he was seeking since the case began. “I wanted to kill Cristina Kirchner and Brenda Uliarte wanted her dead,” he said.

,This kid defied any trial logic. “He didn’t come to defend himself.”He said this in an office in Comodoro Paya 2002, as he kept a minute-by-minute watch on what was happening on Wednesday afternoon, in the AMIA room, in the basement of the building, where the accused began testifying in an investigation before the Federal Court of Justice 6 .

He was not hesitant when it came to answering questions, and at times, it seemed that many lawyers were not prepared for the questioning that Sabag would face. There came a time when he dominated the audience,I can go ahead, no problem ”, she launched while the lawyers looked at the clock. It was time to hear them. She was the president of the court, Sabrina NamerWhich put some questions to rest. It seemed like the last straw for Namer was when Prosecutor Gabriela Biegun asked him if he “loved” Brenda.

Meanwhile, Sabag enjoyed his prominence and invited the parties to consult him. “Any other questions?” “Anything else?”

from the back of the room, Brenda Uliarte and Nicolas Carrizo They looked at him expectantly. When he was brought into the hearing room early in the morning, long before reporters were allowed to enter the room, Sabaag glared venomously at Kopitos’ boss., “Bobo, Gil”, He chided her.

From the lecture, he would accuse her of interfering in organizing the attack, to which Sabag said – he did not invite her.”“I never told Carrizo what I was going to do to protect myself.”, She complained because Copitos’ boss was charging for social plans and because in the chat Carrizo talked about a gun he gave her but that never surfaced. “He unjustly blamed himself,” he claimed.

Because? According to his words, Carrizo and Uliarte received money from Cristina Kirchner to “be able to fill it.” “I know that they received money to spoil the conspiracy of two or three people. “They carried out counterintelligence actions to dirty the field,” he said, without elaborating, in line with what he said in his letters that reached the court. “Judge, I don’t like to talk about myself from a certain height. I have a house, I have money, they were able to finance it. They made these false statements among themselves,” he said.

Advocate Gaston MaranoCarrizo’s defender, left the hearing cheerful. Sabbag’s statements alienated his client, validating his strategy from the first moment: the chats that led him to prison were just “dark humor.”

Brenda Uliarte was far from where Sabag Montiel and Carrizo were. He was accompanied by his lawyer the entire time. One detail caught the attention of observers: when they read the charges against her and repeated the content of their chats, the young woman was heard predicting while reviewing the dialogue with her friend that “today I will become San Martín.” A smile escaped his mouth.

Sabagh was devoted to Brenda. He did not call her by her name. Uliarte called her that.”She listened to my ideas, what I wanted to do and where I wanted to go. She wasn’t sure what I could do. Maybe she took it as a child’s play, not something serious, profound. And although that made it complicated, there was no stopping it. They didn’t say ‘Let’s not do this, we could go to jail, we could complicate our lives.’ I wanted some words to come out so I could stop… They did not assess the consequences and the consequences are serious… And some Cipolla?”, he replied in defense of the young woman. The lawyer asked him if his client had ever inspired him. “Yes,” he answered.

The prosecutor asked him for more information. And there Sabag uttered the phrase that would freeze those present and make the headlines leave the portals.”I wanted to kill her (Cristina Kirchner) and she (Brenda) wanted me to die. Although in the conversation he said he wanted to do it, I never told him or ordered him to do it. I never gave him a gun to do it. “She wanted to be more of a spectator of that moment than a participant,” he said. Although the prosecution announced that it would try to include the aggravated circumstance of gender violence, there was no question in that regard. Sabagh clarified that he never hit Brenda.

The lawyers were sparring to see who would proceed with the questioning, while Namer tried to decide who should be given a chance. Sabag wanted to continue answering. “If I attack someone who has protection, both of us could get hurt, both the victim and me. There were factors that stopped me. When I extended my hand there was a 7-year-old girl next to me.”, he assured. “I hit the target in the face.”

There was an unusual situation: Prosecutor Begun said she was being discriminated against because they did not let her ask why she was a woman. The person in charge of the debate is a judge. With irony, the judge took up the challenge and said “this woman is going to sentence President Sabagh’s defender”.

Sabag’s words confirmed much of the reconstruction that Prosecutor Carlos Rivolo and Judge María Eugenia Cappuccini. He did not close what happened to his phone. Sabag had already expressed these doubts in his letters.

However, the statement of the accused does not convince the CFK complaint led by Marcos Aldazabal and José Manuel Ubera. They are skeptical of his statements and will try to emphasize the flaws of the investigation and the suspicion that an intellectual was the author behind the attack.

guard Fernanda López Puleiro They asked him about his health problems several times. Sabag only pointed to an issue of atherosclerosis that had already been cured. Doubts Remain. One of the speculations about what their strategy will be is related to casting doubts on his innocence. We will have to see what the defense psychological expert says when he appears at the trial.

If this letter does not work, there is also likely to be discussion as to whether assassination can actually be carried out: If there was no bullet in the chamber, the crime would have been unlikely to occur. This could reduce the estimated fine by half.

“What was thought to be a decision has changed“, he pointed out infobae A judicial source barely completed the first hearing. He also predicted that many witnesses could give up because of Sabagh’s statements. “They are no longer needed,” he says. However, others who sought advice prefer to wait. The accused are not obliged to tell the truth.

However, the next hearing will be held next Wednesday. There Brenda Uliarte and Nicolas Carrizo will have the opportunity to testify. Carrizo already planned to speak. And Brenda?