Daniel Urresti’s lawyer announces that they will be asking INPE to transfer him to the Virgen de la Merced prison for his safety.

Lawyer Daniel Urresti, Alexander Leivaconfident that the current 12-year prison sentence against the former presidential candidate will be canceled by filing an appeal for cancellation before Supreme Court. “He is calm because he has confidence, like us, as a defense. that when it is brought before the Supreme Court, it will overrule”he said in no turns RPP.

However, after learning that Urresti was being held in the Miguel Castro Castro prison, Leyva assured that tomorrow they would submit a letter to the National Penitentiary Institute (INPE) in which he was sent to the Virgen de la Merced prison in the Lima district of Lima. chorrillo.

“Given INPE’s decision to send him to prison Castro Castro We are sending a letter to INPE in the morning asking that, given the qualities he possesses as a retired general Armysend him to prison Virgin of Mercy Chorrillos, a prison created for the military and ex-military, ”he claimed in RPP News.

He added that “in any case” there is a fear that his patron will spend time in jail. Miguel Castro Castro though he clarified that he had not discussed it with Daniel Urresti yet. “For this reason, it is precisely to ensure that he is sure that we will ask for a transfer to the Virgen de la Merced prison,” he said.

Also a lawyer Alexander Leivapointed out that the decision against Daniel Urresti This is quite arbitrary and unfair. Moreover, it indicates that at no time Isabella Chipana said Urresti plant explosives bustios.

The question of the position of the court

At the hearing, the court ruled that the Daniel Urresti about his alleged ignorance of the sabotage struggle or that he remembered the surname and nickname of the personnel with whom he carried out operations. In response, the lawyer Alexander Leivapointed out that a serious error had been made in the reading of the verdict.

“The judge begins by saying clearly: ‘The evidence of the defendant, which we are going to analyze.’ We’re not going to take this as evidence.but how Remedies because procedurally, a person who is being prosecuted when he gives his testimony cannot be evaluated as evidence,” he continued.

“The judge starts by making this precision very successful.. But after development (over the course of hours), while we continued to listen to the audience, we found that the reasoning of the judge evidence is given. So what he told us at the beginning was not true, and this is a serious contradiction that we are going to question in the annulment appeal that we are going to present,” he concluded.

To the question of what Daniel Urresti was accused of assaulting journalist Hugo Bustios while he was on the ground after being shot, in order to later use an explosive device on the correspondent’s body to masksthe lawyer qualified this version as false.

“All witnesses who appeared at the plenary session and all speakers who were documented, with the exception of the statement of the witness Isabelle Rodriguez Chipanano one finds Daniel Urresti in the place where he died Hugo Bustios November 24, 1988,” he said in Sin Vueltas de News RPP.