They refused to grant probation to a businessman and real estate developer accused of fraud in Bariloche

The real estate developer and businessman Gabriel Di Tullio requested through his lawyer Martín Domínguez access the suspension of the trial trial, but the Bariloche judge Víctor Hugo Gangarrosa rejected the granting of that benefit to the accused.

Di Tullio is accused in a case of fraud due to fraudulent administration. The former gubernatorial candidate for the Podemos Proyectar Río Negro (PPR) party is credited with acting as a representative of the trust company of the Solares de Bariloche Trust In 2021, it sold 11 lots located in the “Solares 1-Fideicomiso Solares de Bariloche 1” real estate development to Fernando Boudourian.

Since Boudourian did not live in this city, they signed two sales tickets and granted special power to Di Tullio, with the intervention of the notary Fabricio Fato., so that he could later write them in the name of the buyer. However, according to the complainant, Di Tullio, with the special power he had, sold those lands to another person and harmed Boodourian. That’s why he reported him.

lBecause it has the peculiarity that the criminal action is only driven by the complaint, because Bariloche prosecutors understood that there was no crime. It is not the only one in which the Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) withdrew. The Court of Appeal of the province severely reproached this attitude of the MPF in a ruling that was handed down on May 16. in another case for alleged fraud with the La Herradura real estate development in Dina Huapi and with Boudourian as the complainant.


The defense’s proposals


On May 17, Judge Gangarrosa admitted the reformulation of the charges presented by the lawyers in the complaint despite the resistance of the accused’s private defender. Consequently, the complaint was authorized to continue with the investigation of the reported events.

Last Monday, Domínguez requested probation for Di Tullio. “We understand that the substantive and formal requirements are met,” he said. He explained that before the hearing they had delivered an asset report signed by an accountant, with certification from the local College of Economic Sciences. “accounting for the financial situation of Gabriel Di Tullio” and a socio-environmental report.

He said that andThe businessman offered 100 hours of community tasks within a year. He stressed that he does not have a criminal record, and that the criminal figure being investigated has a punitive claim of less than 3 years.

Said Di Tullio offered “10 million pesos as compensation for the damage, in two equal and consecutive installments.”

“It was proven that he has assets that are around 37 million pesos and I ask the judge to consider the effort that Di Tullio is making in offering to pay 10 million”, indicated Domínguez.

The real estate development is located in the eastern area of ​​Bariloche.

The rejection of the complaint


The lawyer for the complaint Magdalena Sanguinetti and her counterpart Martín Govetto raised their opposition to granting the benefit to Di Tullio. “We are going to oppose, but not in a capricious and capricious way, but in a well-founded way,” Sanguinetti clarified. And he cited a ruling from the Court of Appeal.

This accusation has the intention of taking the accused to trial and we anticipate that, at the time of the accusation control hearing, we will request an effective sentence,” he stated. “It is not true that the punitive claim is less than three years,” he said.

Furthermore, he reported that there was no consent from the victim to the granting of the benefit. “Mr. Boudourian wants this case to be brought to trial,” he insisted.. “And we understand that Bariloche society also needs to prevent situations of scams or fraud linked to real estate developments from continuing to occur in the city. and that this has a place because it is an issue of extreme concern, current affairs and a large number of cases, such as the present one,” he highlighted.

He indicated that andThe property damage in the formulation of charges is close to 1.7 million dollars, according to appraisals dated July 24, 2021 and information that the accused provided to the complainant via WhatsApp that was extracted from an expert cell phone.

“We have a financial loss that is around 1.7 to 2 million dollars and in contrast to this, the defendant offers as the highest offer, which would be his maximum demonstration of regret, the equivalent of 10,000 dollars, which represents 0.5% of the property damage caused,” warned the plaintiff attorney. “We understand that this is a total disproportionate and inadmissible offer for the granting of the benefit,” he concluded.


The patrimonial situation


He informed the judge that They analyzed the economic capacity of the accused, with reports that they requested from the Real Estate, Automotive and Legal Entity Registries.

“In the socio-environmental report presented by the defense it is confirmed that he is a businessman, a real estate developer and a chocolate marketer. He publicly presents himself as the owner of Frantom,” Sanguinetti explained.

He said that from the Río Negro Automotive Property Registry they were informed that he owns a Renault Duster truck, his wife owns a Fiat 500 Pro. “But the accused also denied in this statement and in this socio-environmental report that he owned an Audi A4 2.0 TFS,” he said.

The lawyer stated that hUntil May 2024, “20 days ago, I owned a 2018 Mercedes Benz all-terrain truck.” He revealed that according to the tax valuation, its cost is 51,271,000 pesos.

That car left the defendant’s estate only 20 days ago. He had requested the suspension of the trial trial prior to seizing the automobile and despite that, today he states that 10 million pesos is an offer that is reasonable for him and would be his maximum effort,” Sanguinetti objected.

“This attitude of the accused of hiding assets, of emptying his assets, of dispossessing an important, imported vehicle, once he requested the benefit of suspension of trial to probation, In our view, it denotes procedural bad faith and, above all, does not demonstrate a true and serious effort, nor an attitude of repentance,” he alleged.

He said that he also “uses a RAM truck that is owned” by a company that from Legal Entities “sent us the incorporation file of this company.” and it turns out that the only partner is Mr. Di Tullio. He is 100% owner of the shares.”

The complainant mentioned the reports they requested from Immigration that show trips by Di Tullio alone and some in the company of his family from 2020 to date to Chile, the United States, the Dominican Republic, and Uruguay.

Sanguinetti indicated that the report from the Real Estate Registry shows that the accused is the owner of two properties adjacent to the land where he has his home. That Di Tullio Enprendimientos A “is the sole owner” of the company. And it has 14 functional units of the Solar subdivision.

“The accused states that his assets are only 37 million pesos. An accounting certification from March 2024 is attached. We read it and what it says is that it is made on the basis of Mr. Di Tullio’s own statements and declarations. It does not certify his assets,” the lawyer observed.

“We understand that the benefit should be rejected without further processing because it does not comply with the requirements, because it is inadmissible and because the amount offered is unreasonable,” he concluded.

On May 17, the hearing was held where Judge Gangarrosa admitted the reformulation of the charges made in the complaint against Gabriel Di Tullio.

The defense’s reply


Dominguez replied. “The punitive claim, clearly, the complaint is doing futurology,” he stated. “They talk about an amount of damage, an amount calculated capriciously, it is not accredited anywhere. “It has no foundation,” she warned.

“Doctor, let’s not turn this reparation for the damage that is offered in a trial suspension into compensation,” Domínguez asked the judge.

Gangarrosa recalled that for the granting of the probation institute, “the consent of the accused and the prosecutor’s office, and in this case of the complaining party, is required.”

The complainant has rejected the offer and has made a well-founded opposition: this is motivated and reasonable“, he claimed. He mentioned that there are several rulings that provide “that The right of access to justice and to be heard by the victim is a fundamental right to take into account. and in this case the victim clearly does not accept reparation.”

“I will not accept the request to suspend the trial to trial,” he resolved. Di Tullio, who participated in the public hearing, which was held via Zoom, did not say anything. Boudourian didn’t ask to speak either.

The public hearing where the defense made the request for probation was held virtually on Monday.

The investigation period was extended


gOvetto requested a 30-day extension of the deadline for the preparatory investigation stage, which expires on June 15. He reminded the judge of the case. “Here there are some lots that belonged to Boodourian, Di Tullio gives them to him, he sells them to Centena, we didn’t know what he did because he didn’t remember when we interviewed him, but we obtained reports from the Real Estate Registry on Friday and now we know who they would be. those owners.”

“There is a very important deputy from Buenos Aires, a former ambassador in Ecuador, who we have to look for to know who he bought it from, how much he paid for it. “We are not going to make it to June 15,” he explained.

Sanguinetti commented that they have to ask “the notary Fabricio Fato for a bunch of deeds. We requested it and he did not present them. We have other scriptures to request from you and we do not have them available. Beyond the interviews with the buyers of the lots. We need to have all the information. “We have also not been able to interview a notary who intervened.”

“Centena now appeared with another trust that we do not know what it is and why in a domain report for all these lots,” Govetto added.

Domínguez objected. “We are not going to agree to longer deadlines. “They have had enough time,” he stated. “We understand that this would harm Di Tullio’s procedural situation,” he said.

Gangarrosa agreed with the plaintiffs. “I understand that the representatives of the complaining party have been able to motivate the need to obtain longer deadlines. It is not a violation of the rights of the accused, far from it, it is simply that as private prosecutors they require a longer period of time to produce a series of evidence,” he observed.

“The period they are requesting is simply 30 more days is not disproportionate. I understand that this request is reasonable,” he resolved. And he extended the preparatory investigation until July 24, 2024. Domínguez challenged everything decided by the judge so that another magistrate could review it.

 
For Latest Updates Follow us on Google News
 

-

PREV Drunk, he caused disturbances on the anniversary of a town – Más Río Negro
NEXT Medellín also celebrated Atlético Bucaramanga’s first title