(PERIODISTAS/IFEX) – On 12 September 2002, the Chubut province First Criminal Court acquitted three men accused of murdering journalist Ricardo Gangeme. Gangeme was shot in the head on 13 May 1999. The judges based their decision on the federal police’s expert report, which stipulated that it was not possible to determine that the fatal bullet […]
(PERIODISTAS/IFEX) – On 12 September 2002, the Chubut province First Criminal Court acquitted three men accused of murdering journalist Ricardo Gangeme. Gangeme was shot in the head on 13 May 1999. The judges based their decision on the federal police’s expert report, which stipulated that it was not possible to determine that the fatal bullet came from the gun they had as evidence.
The judges stated they could not determine with certainty the link between the crime and the accused and therefore, the accused were acquitted of all charges. The defendants included Osvaldo Daniel Viti, accused of ordering the assassination, Gustavo Fabián Smith, accused of carrying out the crime, and Alejandro Zabala accused of acting as an accessory to the crime. Public Prosecutor Ricardo Vázquez Pellegrini had asked that all three accused be sentenced to life imprisonment.
Gangeme, director of the weekly magazine “El Informador Chubutense”, was shot in the head in front of his apartment building in downtown Trelew, 100 metres from a police station and the Chubut Regional Police Division’s offices. In the magazine’s last four issues before his death, Gangeme had published information regarding three court cases against the Trelew Electrical Cooperative. The cases addressed the irregularities that existed in the purchase of electricity supply by Corralon Fernandes.
Before the trial, Gangeme’s son, Pablo Gangeme, announced that there were abnormalities in his father’s murder investigation. One of these was that Corralon owner and businessman Héctor Fernandes had not been investigated, even though he had threatened Gangeme days before his murder. Fernandes was not present during the trial because he is in jail suspected of bank fraud in an unrelated case.
Pablo Gangeme also cited anomalies in the handling of the evidence, especially with regards to the bullet extracted from his father’s cranium. The projectile was analysed three times. First by the Chubut police, then by the national police, and lastly by the federal police. According to the testimony of the officers who did the analysis, they could not confirm that the bullet had been fired from the gun that the District Attorney presented as evidence. The gun had been seized from the accused.
The judges, Juan Angel Di Nardo, Roberto Rubén Portela and Daniel Rebagliati Russell, said that they could not determine with certainty whether the arm seized, a Smith & Wesson 38 caliber gun, had been used in the crime. “Those who know the facts would note that the prosecution’s case centered around Zabala’s gun being the murder weapon, and so based on the results we conclude that the accused must be absolved,” said the panel of judges, who applied the principal of “guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt”.
Alejandro Vecchi, a lawyer representing Gangeme’s son, said that it may be possible to launch a lawsuit to reopen the investigation. Vecchi said that Public Prosecutor Vázquez Pellegrini “has a judicial obligation to appeal the ruling.” Pablo Gangeme said that “there are a number of pieces of evidence that were not brought forward,” and that is why he will “launch a legal suit to reveal the names of individuals who did not testify, in order to make sure the case continues to be investigated.”
