Rodolfo Sancho, accused of pressuring an ex of Arrieta to testify in favor of his son

The latest and unexpected twist in the case of Daniel Sancho It gets complicated by the minute. After what Rodolfo denounced this Monday that one of the witnesses they were going to count on in the trial had extorted him, the aforementioned has publicly defended himself. Reaffirmed in his version of the events, this Venezuelan man assures that the Sancho’s Spanish defense wanted to ‘guide’ his statement in Thailand and pressured him to lie in court, something to which he refused.

The man, of Venezuelan nationality, contacted Rodolfo Sancho’s lawyers to tell them that he had been a partner of Edwin Arrieta and had reported him for threats in 2021. After verifying the data, the lawyers proposed that he participate in the defense and he accepted. However, after receiving several transfers to buy plane tickets and pay for a visa, he regretted it. According to what he himself said in On everyone’s lips, received strong pressure from lawyers to make his testimony at trial very specific. Now, he fears retaliation: “Daniel’s family has a lot of power in Spain. I am scared. I feel that fear for what could happen to me… Out of love, they are capable of anything and Mr. Rodolfo, out of love for his son, I don’t know to what extent he would be willing to come”has said.

Furthermore, this man has provided some of the messages he received from Rodolfo Sancho himself during these months, among which are “It can’t seem like we’re paying you.”, “When this is over I want to give you a good gift” or “Don’t abandon me, please.”

Rodolfo Sancho denies everything

This Monday, the protagonist of Sea of ​​Plastic anticipated the public appearance of this man by sending a statement to deny all the accusations. According to his version, it was he who asked them for money to testify on his behalf at the trial, something they refused. “I have never looked for a false witness. Never”said Rodolfo. “Many people have asked me for money. I have never offered money. My legal representatives made the transfers because I was a witness for the case. I want to make it clear that it is a fallacy that I have been able to buy anyone. Not witnesses, not the judge “, nor to the prosecutor. Those who suggest this lie and tarnish my image.”