The Arrietas’ lawyer explodes: “Very strange things are happening in the trial and all in favor of Daniel Sancho”

Recently arrived from Thailand, where he has actively participated in the trial against Daniel Sancho at the Koh Samui court, Juan Go Ospina has opened Pandora’s box. The Spanish lawyer who advises the family of Edwin Arrieta and who testified in last Tuesday’s session as a party witness, has denounced important irregularities in the procedure: “In this trial very strange things are happening and all in favor of Sancho.”

From the set of TardeARthe lawyer has assured: “Three weeks ago we thought they were coincidences but now they are black and white and we are going to take action on the matter”. Ospina promises to give more details starting next Monday but has already commented on some of the situations that lead them to suspect the existence of irregularities for the benefit of Rodolfo Sancho’s son: “On Tuesday the power outages began in the area and I was testifying without air conditioning in the room for hours and no one said anything. On Wednesday two police officers testified as witnesses and nothing happened either. On Thursday it was Daniel’s turn to testify and They postpone the statement for days because there is no air conditioning. It is inexplicable, why he does, and the others do not.

Ospina, furthermore, points out that they are filtering interested information that favor Daniel and harm the part of the Arrieta family, for example, that he was expelled from the room last Friday, something that he categorically denies: “We are clear about the origin of all these falsehoods. Nobody expelled me from the room, but they did expel an EFE correspondent for leaks and Daniel Sancho’s official translator. Regarding the leaks, precisely, he also points out: “I am struck by the fact that García Montes (Spanish lawyer defending Daniel Sancho) conveyed the prosecutor’s words this Friday, assuring that they rule out the death penalty and life imprisonment. How can it be that “The prosecutor says that, if there is an express order not to give information to anyone? Has a statement been made and we have not found out?”

Finally, he points out: “The presence of the vice consul of the embassy in the procedure draws our attention powerfully. Why does the vice-consul go to all the sessions of a trial against a confessed dismemberer? He is an official paid with everyone’s money, is it really necessary for him to go to all the sessions to accompany the family of a confessed dismemberer? We had never seen this before.”