Laudelina plans to complicate Loan’s family in the investigation of the disappearance with his new statementAccording to his legal representative, the lawyer Mónica Chirivín.
READ MORE: The new lawyer for Loan’s family attacked Fernando Burlando
The lawyer gave a long interview with Guillermo Andino on A24 and assured that “Two things must be made clear here. The first statement she gave under my advice, where she was able to tell her truth because of the fear he had of politicians.”
“They could kill her for saying that. You know what it’s like to give a word to the power that will lie, that will maintain the lie and when they left her prisoner they left her alone, she could speak calmly in Buenos Aires. That should not be forgotten because these statements were corroborated,” Chirivin insisted.
Mónica announced that “now this expansion of her statement It will clarify some points from the previous one. It will simply expand on details from the previous one that perhaps were not very clear.”
LAUDELINA NAMED LOAN’S FAMILY BEFORE JUSTICE
“And it will emphasize on the day of the incident, in some things that she observed and heard and saw, that perhaps she did not give importance to because she never thought that that could be. Now, over the course of these months, the behaviors of different actors show that what she heard, saw and perceived was not so wrong. And I’m not talking about El Naranjal, precisely,” the lawyer dropped the bomb.
The journalist responded “let’s see, doctor, we have to interpret because you protect what she is going to do later in her expansion.”
“Of course, if not then they call my attention,” Monica justified the impossibility of going into details.
Andino speculated “I imagine this: “suspicious issues that Laudelina saw in the context of that famous food photo.”
“No, after the boy disappears.”Chirivín expanded.
William deduced that it was “after the disappearance, when despair begins for some…”.
“Of course, for some and not so much for others,” The lawyer said everything without going over the line.
The driver pulled his tongue when he said that “Laudelina begins to see that there was an act, an action by some.”
“And something like that, but I don’t know if it’s acting because in reality the prosecutors will have to corroborate that once she says it. Why didn’t you say it before? Because to say something, you have to have the evidence. That is, as a defense, I make sure that what she says can be corroborated. “This had to happen for a while to see if that was true,” Monica explained.
Chirivín redoubled the bet by declaring thatand “it is very easy to tell the truth. Here they are all saying that Laudelina is going to find out from under her sleeve where the boy is. That’s impossible. I think the mother would have to ask herself and surely find the answer.”
“Let’s see, doctor, ask about what you just said, because, let’s see, it tells us that LAudelina is going to talk about things she saw and heard on June 13, which today take on another aspect, another meaning. Now, can some of these issues become data linked to Loan’s family?”Guillermo asked.
The lawyer did not give in: “Oh, Andino, I can’t answer you.”
“He is responding to me. If it’s no, he tells me no.. Now, do we always talk about the context of trafficking?” the journalist asked.
Mónica clarified that “I understand that it is still trafficking because the movement of a person, “the transfer of a person without their consent, much more so if they are a minor, beyond the purposes for which they were kidnapped.”
“Maybe it could have been a debt, maybe it could be drug trafficking, it could be for other purposes. I have no idea, But prosecutors can determine that by cross-calls and a lot of other things,” Chirivín concluded.