La justicia de Córdoba anuncia un sospechoso en el feminicidio de Nora Dalmasso, 18 años después del crimen. Sin embargo, la causa está prescrita y no se podrán tomar acciones legales. El caso, lleno de contradicciones y teorías sobre relaciones personales complejas, sigue sin resolverse completamente.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Nora Dalmaso. It has been 18 years since the crime. 18 years later, the justice
00:06raises its hand and says, we have a suspect. And the justice says something else.
00:12Not only do we have a suspect, we have the one we believe to be
00:17the murderer of Nora Dalmaso. They say, we will not be able to do anything with him
00:23because the cause is prescribed. How is this? We'll explain it to you right away,
00:28but first, look at the report. It seems that this end of the year is assigned
00:33by updates or twists in causes that have been unpunished for decades. It happened
00:38a couple of weeks ago with the disappearance of Maria Cash, and now it happens with the
00:42murder of Nora Dalmaso. 18 years later, the Cordova justice announced
00:48a finding that could reactivate the cause. A clear example of imperfect crime.
00:54Without detainees, without defendants, and with a trial over a couple of years ago.
00:59The murderer continues to walk the streets, like any citizen. Who killed her?
01:05In the last hours, it was possible to detect and isolate a genetic data of a suspect
01:17that a researcher once said. Do you know where the murderer of Nora Dalmaso is?
01:25Look for him in the DNA of the robe.
01:30The prosecutor of the case, Pablo Jávega, announced that a person of male sex
01:35appears to be a carrier compatible with the genetic traces collected in the woman's robe belt.
01:42That is, there is a genetic trace found in the clothes and the body of Dalmaso,
01:47which led to this new suspect and does not belong to the family.
01:51Let us remember that Nora was found murdered at dawn on November 26, 2006,
01:56in her house in the Villa Golf neighborhood of Río Cuarto, where she lived with her husband,
02:01Marcelo Macarrón, who was on a trip at that time, with whom she had two children, Facundo and Valentina.
02:08The forensics determined that Nora died of strangulation and her half-naked body
02:14was lying in her daughter's bed.
02:16She had had consensual sexual relations a while before she died.
02:21Five prosecutors with different hypotheses were prosecuted for the cause,
02:25and they were impeached, in addition to the widow Macarrón,
02:28an ex-advisor of the Cordoban government, Rafael Mañasco,
02:31the albanil Gastón Zárate, the famous priest of the case,
02:35and Facundo Macarrón, the victim's son.
02:38They were all prosecuted.
02:41This could be the last attempt to find out the identity of the woman's killer.
02:46It seems that the secret was in the robe.
02:49Nora Dalmaso continues to ask for justice.
02:56So that you can understand this news that we are telling you,
02:59and so that you can understand if this man,
03:03who is now accused of being the killer, is really the culprit,
03:07it is necessary to do a small review of what happened
03:11at the end of November 2006 in the province of Córdoba
03:16with that woman that you are seeing on the screen, with Nora Dalmaso.
03:20On November 26, 2006, Nora did not answer her phone.
03:27Nora was a 51-year-old woman who worked in the family funeral home,
03:32in the family business, in the funeral home.
03:35She had stayed alone at home that weekend.
03:40Now I'm going to explain why she was alone.
03:42And her mother had tried to contact her and Nora did not answer the cell phone.
03:48Cell phones that had just begun to become smartphones at that time.
03:52She sent him a text message and Nora did not answer.
03:55Until Nora's mother asks a neighbor, a 72-year-old man,
04:00to see why Nora did not answer.
04:04The man enters the house, goes up to the first floor of the house,
04:09enters the main room and finds nothing.
04:12He enters the room, one of the smallest rooms in the house,
04:16the room that belonged to Valentina, Nora's daughter,
04:19and there he finds Nora Dalmaso's body with a particularity.
04:26Nora had a semi-open robe
04:30and the belt of the robe surrounded her neck.
04:33Quickly, this man, this neighbor, calls the police.
04:37And there begins an investigation to see who had killed Nora Dalmaso.
04:42And from that moment on, everything goes wrong.
04:46I always summarize the case of Nora Dalmaso with those two words.
04:50Everything wrong. Why?
04:51Because when the police arrive on November 26th to see the body,
04:56a man arrives too, a prosecutor named Javier Di Santo.
05:00That prosecutor allowed 27 people to pass through the crime scene in one hour.
05:07My God.
05:08With Nora, with Nora's body just found,
05:14the prosecutor, Javier Di Santo, let a priest come in
05:18to give the last... how do you say?
05:22The last greeting, let's say, to say goodbye.
05:25Do you know what that priest did?
05:27He grabbed a sheet and covered Nora's face because he felt like he was seeing her.
05:32That is, the priest, with the body just found,
05:35grabbed the sheet, which could be a key evidence,
05:38moved it, contaminated it with his fingers and covered her face.
05:42What was discovered?
05:44That that weekend Nora Dalmaso, who was a woman who had a very good economic past,
05:49was married to a man named Marcelo Macarrón.
05:52A very wealthy person who had political contacts
05:57and that that weekend, coincidentally, he had gone to Punta del Este to play golf.
06:03Therefore, Nora was not with her husband.
06:06They had two children.
06:07Valentina, who at that time was in exchange student in New York
06:13and Facundo, who that weekend was in Córdoba Capital.
06:18They were not from Córdoba Capital.
06:20Rio Cuarto, they were.
06:22Exactly.
06:23Nora was alone.
06:24What were the previous hours like for Nora?
06:27Well, on Friday, November 24,
06:31she is found on Sunday.
06:33On Friday, she goes to eat with her friends
06:37and when she returns at one in the morning,
06:40she sends a message to her lover.
06:42The only lover that Nora Dalmaso had.
06:46And why do I say the only lover?
06:48And this, Franco, will remember well.
06:50Because as the investigation began,
06:53Nora Dalmaso was accused of having slept with every man who had approached her.
06:58With every man.
06:59Well, among those...
07:01With all the country.
07:02Among those, with his own son.
07:04Well, now we are going to get to that part.
07:06I know you're going to get to that part of the story, but since this is coming up.
07:10Among those, with his own son.
07:11Including his son.
07:12Yes.
07:13At 1.30 pm on Friday, he sends a message to his lover.
07:17Where was his lover?
07:19His lover was a friend of her husband
07:21and she was playing golf in Punta del Este with her husband.
07:25There are versions...
07:25Those are the only messages.
07:27There are versions that...
07:28The last messages.
07:28They constituted, I mean the couple, right?
07:32An open couple.
07:33I don't know if this was investigated as it should be,
07:36but there are many colleagues, Marcin,
07:40who are affirming this at this time, starting from...
07:41That it was an open relationship.
07:42Yes, that justice somehow came to that conclusion
07:46from the testimony, from the multiple testimonies of Marcelo Macarrón
07:50throughout all these years.
07:51And from other informants, let's say.
07:53Yes, conclusion that I, from what I could know...
07:56Let's see, it doesn't change much, but...
07:58No, no, it doesn't change much, no.
07:59Of course it's an open relationship, but it doesn't mean that...
08:01That they're going to kill you, of course.
08:03No, what it does allow us is to read in retrospect this that you pointed out.
08:07That is, why was she so responsible, in any case,
08:11to manage her pleasures?
08:12That is, to have a lover.
08:14Well, since they didn't know who had killed her,
08:16the prosecutor, Javier Di Santo, said,
08:19she has to be a lover.
08:20And why did he say she has to be a lover?
08:22Because on Nora's body and on the robe,
08:26they had found a man's DNA.
08:29So they said, Nora had sex with her lover,
08:33with one of her lovers,
08:35and then that lover killed her, killed her.
08:39That's what they thought at that moment, in those first days.
08:43The truth is that the prosecutor, Javier Di Santo,
08:46didn't know who his lover was, theoretically.
08:49So he said, it could be any of the people he was close to.
08:53In fact, they invented, and you'll remember this, two things.
08:56First, a t-shirt that said,
08:58I didn't sleep with Norita,
09:00because the joke at that moment was that everyone had slept together.
09:03And the game of the vase.
09:05Do you remember the game of the vase?
09:07That they said, it consisted of everyone throwing the car keys,
09:11mixing them, and the car key of a man came out with that of a woman,
09:15and that they were going to have sexual relations.
09:17They tried to invent it, they could never prove any of that.
09:21The truth is that, of course, when they went to look for the husband,
09:25the husband said, I was in Punta del Este, I couldn't have been.
09:28And also, Marcelo Macarrón won the tournament in Punta del Este.
09:32There is the photo of that Sunday in Punta del Este,
09:36with the trophy in his hand.
09:38Javier Di Santo discovers the prosecutor,
09:41and this is important because it has to do with the news
09:44of the last few hours, that possibly the DNA that had been found
09:51on Norita's body had a macarron lineage.
09:55What does macarron lineage mean?
09:57We don't know what macarron it is, but it's from someone.
10:01It has to be from someone with the last name Macarrón.
10:04Nora Dalmaso's father-in-law was very tall, an 80-year-old man.
10:07It can't be.
10:09They said, Marcelo Macarrón.
10:10We already told you that he was playing golf in Punta del Este.
10:13What other macarron do we have left out there, said the prosecutor.
10:17And one raised his hand in the prosecutor's office and said,
10:19I choose Facundo Macarrón.
10:22I have enough, bring him.
10:24Prisoner accused of murdering his mother.
10:26In fact, Facundo Macarrón, who is this young man that you see here,
10:30had to go out publicly to say that he was gay.
10:34In other words, they forced him to say that he was gay
10:36so that there was no prisoner accused of murdering his mother.
10:38To recognize his sexuality.
10:42No, no, he was gay, really.
10:43Yes, journalism there, or part of journalism to be more exact,
10:48behaved at that time, we are talking about a long time ago,
10:51not the year 2006.
10:52But there was journalism that behaved with Facundo Macarrón
10:55in a very, very violent way.
10:57Very cruel, really.
10:58Very cruel, precisely from his sexual orientation.
11:02But also, what many colleagues inferred from his sexual orientation,
11:06Martin, was that that's why, because in theory his mother
11:10did not accept his sexual orientation,
11:12he had taken revenge on his mother.
11:14Killing her.
11:15Killing her.
11:16These are versions that ran, ran with force at that time.
11:19How is it proven?
11:20Because you told us that he was in Córdoba Capital.
11:22Of course.
11:23Of course.
11:24That's what Facundo Macarrón said, that's what Juli said, it's key.
11:27Because if I give you in Córdoba Capital, it doesn't matter.
11:29They said, you have to be you.
11:31And something similar happened with another character
11:33called Gastón Zárate, the famous perejil.
11:37Exactly.
11:38Gastón Zárate was a perejil.
11:40On those days when Nora was murdered,
11:42they were doing renovations in the house.
11:44And those who did the renovations could not enter through the lower floor
11:49because Nora, who was very afraid of insecurity,
11:51closed the doors with a key.
11:53And the doors were not forced.
11:55That's the one who's there, Gastón Zárate.
11:57What did Gastón Zárate do to enter the house?
11:59To work.
12:00He climbed a tree and entered from the top of the house.
12:05Of course, when a domestic employee declares and says,
12:08how did the albaní enter?
12:10The domestic employee says, he climbed like a monkey through the trees
12:13and entered the house.
12:15Avalado by Nora.
12:16By Nora, of course.
12:17What did the prosecutor Javier Di Santo say?
12:18Ready, that's it.
12:19A guy who climbs through the trees,
12:21enters through a window, it must have been him.
12:23Arrested.
12:24Look at the disconcert there was.
12:27And what is there to this day too.
12:29In that disconcert they put you in jail.
12:31First Gastón Zárate, the perejil.
12:34Then Facundo Macarrón, they end up releasing them
12:37because there was no evidence.
12:39The prosecutor has been with the cause for 12 years.
12:41Then comes another prosecutor, the prosecutor Miralles.
12:44What does the prosecutor Miralles say?
12:46I have another hypothesis.
12:48The murderer was Marcelo Macarrón.
12:50But if we said he was playing in Punta del Este, no.
12:53What happened is that he got on a ghost plane,
12:57traveled to Cordoba without anyone seeing him,
13:00killed her, had sex with her, killed her,
13:03got on another ghost plane and returned to Punta del Este
13:06to continue playing.
13:07The prosecutor was a fool.
13:09That's what Miralles said.
13:10It's easily verifiable.
13:11A plane, there's a pilot.
13:12Unverifiable.
13:13That's the word.
13:14What would have been the mobile phone?
13:15So unverifiable.
13:16Well, because there was a heritage dispute between them.
13:19What was the proof he had of all that?
13:22None.
13:23There was no proof.
13:24Of course not.
13:25There was still talk of passion crime.
13:27Today we say femicide.
13:29Of course.
13:30And it was precisely the fact, for many,
13:33that as Norita had sexual relations,
13:36or allegedly had sexual relations,
13:38with other men,
13:39the revenge of her husband,
13:41when he found out about his lovers,
13:43was to murder her.
13:44No, of course.
13:45Everything was contradictory.
13:47Because, on the one hand, they played with the story
13:49that they had an open couple.
13:51On the other hand, it was a revenge
13:53for the hypothetical sexual excesses
13:56of Nora.
13:58The contradictions were constant.
14:02And when this last thing you said
14:04about the plane and everything...
14:05Well, look, there's more still.
14:06Because then comes another prosecutor
14:08with a bizarre last name who says,
14:10no.
14:11Neither the son, nor the albanil,
14:13nor the ghost flight.
14:15What Marcelo Macarron did
14:17was hire two Colombian hitmen
14:19to kill Nora.
14:21Very good.
14:22We have no proof.
14:24In fact, that hypothesis didn't even get to trial.
14:27The prosecutor of the trial,
14:28when he was going to be tried,
14:29said, I can't do this.
14:31I can't even go on.
14:32And why Colombians?
14:33Because they had the crazy hypothesis
14:37that he could be a Colombian hitman.
14:41Everything was completely ruled out.
14:43Marcelo Macarron goes to trial.
14:45The trial is overturned.
14:47And the cause prescribes.
14:51What does it mean that the cause prescribes?
14:53Justice has a certain amount of time
14:57to investigate a crime or a crime.
15:00Because if not, justice would take 30, 40 years
15:03and it doesn't make sense.
15:04So there's a deadline.
15:06In the case of Nora Dalmasso,
15:08in this case that we're talking about,
15:10that time is over, it's over.
15:12Of course.
15:13That is, the cause is prescribed.
15:14But still, the prosecutor of now
15:16continued investigating
15:18and discovered,
15:19and now we're going to the present,
15:20made 200 DNA tests
15:22in all the people who passed
15:24at some point near that weekend
15:26near Nora.
15:28And he discovered in the last few hours
15:30that there is a coincidence
15:32between the DNA that had been found
15:34in Nora's robe
15:36and the DNA of a man
15:38who, for those days,
15:40had gone to place the parquet
15:42of Nora's house.
15:44And with whom, according to the witnesses,
15:46including Nora's mother,
15:49who passed away,
15:50she was 90 years old when she died,
15:52she said that the only one Nora,
15:54I don't know if she was afraid of him,
15:56but had argued,
15:57was with this man.
15:59So, from the beginning,
16:01the family believed
16:03that it could be the parquet maker,
16:05but justice had not given him a ball.
16:07And just now, just now,
16:10they say, well, there is a coincidence
16:12and it could be him.
16:13Now.
16:14Sorry, I want to ask you.
16:15Yes, Julio, of course.
16:16Let's say, this DNA,
16:17because the DNA analysis
16:19was not done now,
16:20it was done at the time,
16:21it was done once,
16:22I don't know how many times it can be done.
16:23Yes.
16:24So, this data was there,
16:25but they didn't want to use it.
16:26No, no, no.
16:27But not the parquet maker.
16:28The comparison with the parquet maker
16:29is done now.
16:30But that's why,
16:31but the DNA...
16:32The DNA was taken in 2006.
16:33The parquet maker's, I say.
16:34The parquet maker's
16:35is taken now.
16:36They had just taken the parquet maker's.
16:38Exactly.
16:39When they did 200 DNA tests.
16:40Now.
16:41A person with whom they knew
16:42they had argued,
16:43they did not take the DNA.
16:44Who was in the house
16:45the last few days.
16:46That's why I started
16:47this block saying
16:48they did everything wrong.
16:50Now we are going to talk
16:51to someone who knows a lot
16:52about the cause,
16:53but I close with this.
16:55The only way
16:56that the prescription is cut,
16:58and here I corrected myself,
16:59Cesar,
17:00is that this man
17:02has a crime,
17:04or they are investigating it,
17:05or he has a sentence,
17:07or at least a complaint.
17:09Apparently, he doesn't have it.
17:11Therefore,
17:13if now
17:14the parquet maker comes out,
17:16stands in front of the cameras
17:18and says,
17:19you know what?
17:20I killed Nora Dalmas.
17:22I was that November 25th,
17:24I sexually abused her
17:26and I killed her.
17:28Do you know what we have to do?
17:29Give her the hand
17:30and say thank you for the confession.
17:31Go home.
17:32You can't do anything.
17:34You have to see
17:35if the prosecutor does not resort to 131
17:37and puts the 20 years of prescription.
17:40There is a possibility
17:42that he prescribes the 20 years
17:44and it is 2006-2026.
17:46No, but they tried it like that
17:48and they couldn't.
17:49Exactly.
17:50That's why the three-year cause
17:51that is prescribed.
17:52Exactly.
17:53I want to greet Mario Vignolo,
17:55who is a forensic expert
17:56who worked on the case,
17:58who has his hypothesis of the case.
18:00Hello Mario, how are you?
18:01Good afternoon.
18:02How are you?
18:03Good afternoon to everyone.
18:04Good, good afternoon.
18:05Before I give you the floor
18:07and ask you all the questions we have,
18:09I want to share with you and everyone
18:11the statements that the new suspect
18:13who has the case
18:15had made at the time.
18:17At the time he had said,
18:20I was always calm
18:22because I knew I hadn't done anything.
18:26This is what Roberto Bárzola said.
18:28I found out what happened
18:30because my boss told me.
18:32It was another of the statements
18:33he gave at that time,
18:35not only in justice,
18:36but also in the media.
18:37The lady had seen him
18:40only once.
18:41He didn't deal with us.
18:43My boss always talked to Marcelo.
18:46Marcelo is macaron.
18:48I only talked to her
18:49the time she reproached me about the dust.
18:51The lady had reproached me
18:53a few days before what happened.
18:56Well, this is key
18:58because this is what Nora's mother meant
19:00when she said
19:01the only one who had an altercation
19:03was with Bárzola,
19:04with the parker.
19:05And finally she ends up saying
19:06we went back to work at the house
19:08after the crime.
19:09Now, Mario, I greet you again
19:12and we listen to you.
19:13What do you think of all this
19:14that we were commenting on?
19:17Well, I'm surprised like you.
19:21You can't even think about it.
19:23But really,
19:2618 years later,
19:29it would be important
19:30that although there is no justice,
19:31the truth is reached.
19:33I intervened a week after
19:36the incident
19:38when they began to confront
19:39the experts on the part
19:41with the officers.
19:42And then the Attorney General
19:44sent me to investigate
19:45together with another forensic
19:47from the province
19:50if the samples had been collected well,
19:52if they had acted well.
19:54And well, as you said,
19:55the crime scene had not been well fixed.
20:01There were people who had walked,
20:03a priest had come,
20:05but the samples that the experts
20:07had collected
20:09had been done
20:10according to science and technique.
20:12They had collected samples of everything.
20:14And in fact,
20:15those samples that were collected
20:17today serve to cover up
20:18with this alleged new suspect.
20:22So we did that investigation.
20:25I made a profile, a report,
20:27and 16 years passed
20:29and they never asked me to declare anything.
20:33I was just called to testify
20:35when the trial against Macarroni was held.
20:39And well, in two opportunities,
20:42in one week I went twice to testify
20:45to describe the knot,
20:47the modus operandi and all that,
20:49which was one of the things
20:51that the prosecutor used
20:53for the allegation.
20:55Now Mario,
20:56I say, and I also open this
20:58to talk to everyone, right?
21:00I say, when a forceful evidence
21:03like this appears, right?
21:05I say, it does not necessarily mean
21:07that the guy has to be condemned.
21:10No, of course not.
21:11Once that appears,
21:12it is from there that
21:14the investigation begins.
21:15Testimony, whether he was there or not.
21:17Now, in this case,
21:19the prosecutor comes out and says,
21:21we, yesterday he liquidated him,
21:24Barceló liquidated him,
21:25he said, we are convinced
21:26that he is the suspect
21:28because his DNA appears in the robe.
21:30You can't keep investigating.
21:32Why can't you keep investigating?
21:34Because the cause is prescribed.
21:35Therefore, this man Barceló,
21:38who does the trial for him?
21:40In other words, how does he defend himself?
21:42He has no possibility of defending himself.
21:44I don't know if I'm explaining myself.
21:46He's going to have a public media trial
21:49without any kind of guarantee.
21:51I'm not defending him.
21:53I'm just saying that
21:54when someone accuses him
21:55for a right,
21:57it's your right to go and defend yourself.
21:59This man has no right to defend himself
22:01from the accusation they made to him yesterday.
22:03I ask,
22:04and if it's not,
22:06who is he explaining it to?
22:07If the justice is not going to listen to him.
22:08Because there is also something of...
22:10I only raise it semantically.
22:11No, no, but there is also something
22:13that if it was a man
22:14who was working there a few days earlier,
22:16let's say that the DNA is there.
22:18Obviously, why in the robe?
22:19Stop, stop.
22:20It was semen, the DNA.
22:22It was semen.
22:23Ah, ok, that data is not.
22:24That data is strong too.
22:25Ah, ok.
22:26And a beautiful...
22:27That changes everything.
22:28Of course, it was semen and a beautiful public.
22:29Well, that changes everything.
22:30Of course, logically,
22:31he doesn't say,
22:32what does the parker's semen have to do?
22:33That changes 99%.
22:35It has nothing to do with it.
22:36But still,
22:37no matter how much it changes,
22:39I say,
22:40that test is not enough
22:41in traditional justice.
22:42No.
22:43I say, and Bárcela
22:44is now subject to a public trial
22:47out there with reason.
22:48No, no, but apart from putting...
22:50But without any guarantee.
22:51In the middle of all these debates
22:52that took place in 18 years,
22:55he could also have said,
22:57in his defense,
22:58recognize,
22:59I had relationships,
23:00yes, it's mine,
23:01but I left
23:02and I don't know who came in after.
23:03Well, I was going to go to that.
23:04Me too.
23:05I, Martín,
23:06Mario,
23:07and I wanted to ask you
23:08about,
23:09in fact,
23:10in the report
23:11that we put out a minute ago,
23:12it was said,
23:13it was stated,
23:14that the signs
23:15of the body
23:16of Nora Dalmasso
23:17caused by a suffocation
23:19by strangulation,
23:20in theory,
23:21were signs
23:22coming from
23:23a consensual relationship.
23:24That is,
23:25she,
23:26according to the first expertise,
23:27had sexual relations
23:28with someone,
23:29in those relationships
23:30she was suffocated
23:31by strangulation
23:32with consent.
23:33This changes everything.
23:34I say,
23:35this novelty,
23:36this news
23:37of the last few hours
23:38would give the guideline
23:39that it was not,
23:40in effect,
23:41that relationship,
23:42a consensual sexual relationship.
23:43Of course,
23:44a relationship.
23:45Or yes,
23:46or yes,
23:47but it ended like this.
23:48Of course.
23:49A relationship
23:50was a sexual relationship
23:51without
23:52without important aggression.
23:53It was a sexual relationship
23:54that we interpret
23:55as consensual.
23:56In addition,
23:57I put in my report
23:58consensual
23:59or through
24:00the physical
24:01or psychological
24:02force
24:03over the victim.
24:04Okay.
24:05Because there were no
24:06signs of important violence.
24:07That at some point
24:08it comes out of
24:09the cause
24:10and the homicide
24:11is not that
24:12he had premeditated,
24:13but that it is worth
24:14the cord of the robe
24:15that is at the foot
24:16of the bed,
24:17that is,
24:18that he improvises with that
24:19and makes a mixed
24:20strangulation,
24:21manual
24:22and
24:23and
24:24and he ties it
24:25and,
24:26what's more,
24:27he doesn't tie it,
24:28he has a blow
24:29in the head,
24:30in the right hemicranium,
24:31because they are
24:32in a bed
24:33in a square
24:34and when he forces
24:35to surely
24:36to get this rope out,
24:37he hits
24:38against the
24:39against the wall
24:40his head.
24:41That is,
24:42if it was not consensual,
24:43it was a relationship
24:44with a subjugation
24:45that did not
24:46did not take place,
24:47neither signs of defense
24:48nor great signs
24:49Could have been threatened
24:50with a gun too?
24:51Also, also,
24:52difficultly,
24:53but it can be.
24:54Now, if this
24:55had been investigated
24:56at the time,
24:57the first thing
24:58you have to do
24:59at a time
25:00when these samples
25:01were brought
25:0218 years ago,
25:03they were analyzed
25:04in the CEPROCOR
25:05or Institute
25:06of Forensic Genetics
25:07of Cordoba
25:08and in the FBI
25:09of Florida.
25:10If these footprints,
25:11there were 43 patterns,
25:12if they had been
25:13correlated
25:14not only with the family
25:15and with some suspects,
25:16but with
25:18all those who had
25:19frequented the house
25:20in recent times,
25:21surely this would have
25:22been discovered
25:23much earlier
25:24in case it were like that.
25:25What you said
25:26cannot be said no,
25:27it is done in the boot,
25:28it is him,
25:29it may be him,
25:30it may not be him,
25:31there is a lot,
25:32a lot,
25:33a lot of relationship
25:34because it is in the boot
25:35and in a cuban kiss too,
25:36what was discussed,
25:37but it was never discussed
25:38before,
25:39that is,
25:40the DNA
25:41of that moment
25:42was taken at that time,
25:43that is,
25:44there is no danger
25:45of degradation
25:46or anything.
25:47No, no, no,
25:48the DNA is,
25:49the DNA is,
25:50obviously,
25:51the issue is that
25:52you notice that
25:53when in an investigation
25:54you have so many hypotheses
25:55and so varied
25:56and some so crazy,
25:57I send a big greeting
25:58to Professor Raúl Torre,
25:59who was our partner
26:00and that he,
26:01in the Mariana newspaper,
26:02in the old Mariana newspaper
26:03in another channel,
26:04he said here,
26:05I am convinced
26:06that it was a sexual abuse
26:07followed by death,
26:08he was convinced
26:09by what he had investigated
26:10at that time
26:11just to the Great
26:12Emirate
26:13of the United States
26:14that was Valdo Raffo,
26:15right?
26:16But,
26:17I say,
26:18there were already people
26:19who from the beginning
26:20pointed out to Bárcola
26:21and people who said
26:22this was a rape
26:23followed by death
26:24and not merely
26:25a lover
26:26who had a consensual
26:27relationship
26:28and who later
26:29ended up killing her,
26:30that is,
26:31somehow
26:32there were people,
26:33Mario,
26:34who had that hypothesis
26:35already formulated,
26:36the one that today
26:37we believe is the real one.
26:38Yes,
26:39I am a good friend
26:40of Raúl,
26:41even at that time
26:42we had discussions
26:44Now,
26:45I never denied,
26:46although
26:47I had more color
26:48that it was
26:49a consensual relationship,
26:50for a lot of things
26:51that I return
26:52in the report,
26:53but I also said
26:54that it could have been
26:55a forced sexual relationship,
26:56they said
26:57that it had been
26:58in another place
26:59and then brought to bed,
27:00no,
27:01the relationship
27:02was in bed
27:03and that there was
27:04no premeditation,
27:05that is,
27:06or it came out of cause
27:07if it was consensual
27:08or it was killed,
27:09if it was not consensual
27:10that it was a rape,
27:11it was killed
27:12as a criminal homicide
27:13and cause for concealment.
27:14Now,
27:15anyway,
27:16it is clear
27:17that they had
27:18a problematic link,
27:19I say,
27:20Nora Dalmasso
27:21and this
27:22alleged
27:23new killer
27:24of that,
27:25the link
27:26was a problematic link.
27:27Yes,
27:28all that arises now
27:29and the mother
27:30is the one
27:31who first
27:32expressed it,
27:33what I don't know
27:34if he channeled it
27:35through a
27:36statement,
27:37some statement
27:38or some lawyer,
27:39today with the
27:40daily of Monday
27:41everything is very
27:42different,
27:43apart from the
27:44first time
27:45I hear him name
27:46and I know that he
27:47was a witness
27:48in the trial of
27:49Macarrones
27:50and surely
27:51seeing now
27:52what he saw,
27:53he must have been
27:54investigated and
27:55courted.
27:56Do you know why,
27:57sorry Mario,
27:58you also know it,
27:59but they are like
28:00little things that
28:01the cause had,
28:02right?
28:03Do you know why
28:04many doubted
28:05Marcelo Macarron?
28:06Because Marcelo
28:07Macarron playing
28:08golf was very bad,
28:09and just that
28:10weekend
28:11he travels to
28:12Punta del Este
28:13and he comes out
28:14champion,
28:15that was one of
28:16the great doubts
28:17that the file had,
28:18like a guy
28:19who is bad
28:20playing golf,
28:21well,
28:22to exaggerate,
28:23very bad,
28:24bad playing
28:25golf,
28:26who did not
28:27usually win games,
28:28just that weekend
28:29he travels to
28:30Punta del Este
28:31and he comes out
28:32champion.
28:33There is also something
28:34that chronologically,
28:35going to a fiction
28:36I would almost tell you,
28:37you say that the lover
28:38who is one of
28:39the last people
28:40that the night before
28:41sends him a message,
28:42was with her husband
28:43in Punta del Este.
28:44From Friday to Saturday
28:45he writes to the lover
28:46who was,
28:47who was a friend of
28:48Marcelo Macarron.
28:49So that second
28:50prosecutor must have
28:51thought something like that,
28:52like he found out
28:53about the friend,
28:54because he sent him
28:55the message,
28:56he took this
28:57ghost plane,
28:58all that part
28:59of the story,
29:00let's say,
29:01is a fiction
29:02of a platform.
29:03Totally,
29:04it's a fiction.
29:05To put together
29:06each scene.
29:07It is a film
29:08through which
29:09the character
29:10finds himself
29:11each day
29:12and it was like
29:13an absolutely
29:15really crazy situation
29:16in which there was
29:17a person who had
29:18passed away
29:19and in which
29:20every day
29:21a new
29:22lust showed up
29:23that you said
29:24that is
29:25as if it were
29:26bravo
29:27you said
29:28what are they
29:29saying
29:30with
29:32with
29:33with
29:34ugliness
29:35with
29:36In a resistance to understand that in spaces so privatized in every sense, such as private neighborhoods,
29:42due to redundancy, something could happen of the order of ordinary insecurity of those who do not live in a private neighborhood.
29:49Because there was always this resistance, how there, with so much security, how there, with so many resources,
29:55the husband is not going to be, or the lover is not going to be, or the child is not going to be, if no intruder is going to enter.
30:02The theory of the closed room. Now, I ask you and I go back to what we reasoned just now, right?
30:07I ask you who are here, I ask you who are on the other side, what do we do with Bárcola today? Is he the killer?
30:14No one is going to continue investigating much more.
30:17He will not be able to prove it.
30:18Ok, perfect. But with the data we have, for you it is not, then, it is not proven that it is.
30:24For the law it will not be.
30:26For the law it will not be, but for us, for the public, is he the killer? With the fact that DNA appears on his coat? Is it enough?
30:33No, not for me.
30:35Not for you, not for you, Franco?
30:36No, not for me either. I think so, for the family. In fact, well, I have some news about Facundo Macarroni,
30:43he had a great diplomatic career.
30:44Yes, it is true, he is diplomatic.
30:46He did the diplomatic career.
30:48And Valentina, I think she is a doctor or something like that.
30:50In the Argentine ancillary, she is a person who had a hard time, as you can imagine, being able to overcome everything that happened to him,
30:57but fundamentally, of course, also before what happened to his mother, right?
31:02I think that for the family there may be a reparative effect, even if this killer does not go to jail,
31:08even if he does not serve a sentence in a prison.
31:11Sometimes finding the culprit, finding the responsible, emotionally repairs the victims.
31:16What happens is that even if there is a minimum doubt, even if there is a minimum doubt, even if there is a 0.01% doubt,
31:24you can no longer judge him, you can no longer reach the conclusion.
31:27Well, that's it.
31:28Because if you are exo, in case the man masturbated and dried himself with the plant.
31:32That's what Juli says.
31:34She calls him the killer, look how socially.
31:38No, I mean, obviously it is the presumed killer.
31:41Exactly.
31:42No, it's okay.
31:43But how does the head work?
31:45Exactly, but what Calle says is key.
31:48Because in a trial, you, to condemn a person, you have to be, you know.
31:52Obvious.
31:53100% sure.
31:54Indubitably.
31:55There doesn't have to be what Calle just said, the slightest doubt.
32:00Indubitably.
32:01And here, don't we have the slightest doubt?
32:03You, Santi, you see Bárcola with the information we have.
32:06You say, is he the killer?
32:08It seems to me that he would be the killer.
32:10But you are not sure.
32:11No, you can't.
32:13So what do we do with Bárcola?
32:15When Bárcola goes to buy the warehouse,
32:18aren't they going to look at him as the killer?
32:20Who also continues to live in Córdoba.
32:22Who also continues to live in Córdoba.
32:23Aren't they going to look at him?
32:24Isn't the killer there right now?
32:25Obviously.
32:26So when they see this man, and I'm not defending him,
32:29I'm just trying to describe a situation that is going to happen.
32:33Exactly.
32:34No, it's okay because it highlights the real problem in this story,
32:39which are the terrible decisions that the Judicial Power of Córdoba made.
32:42Totally.
32:43In retrospect, that is, how, and you listed it,
32:45the prosecutors prior to the arrival of this prosecutor did things very, very badly.
32:50Yes, all of them.
32:51That is, the graphic, anecdotal situation,
32:54but at the same time, which inflated the scene of the crime,
32:58of the priest covering the corpse with a bandage,
33:04also reinstates us in the dimension of the political power that this crime always,
33:09I say, somehow awakened.
33:11That is, its possible relationship with the political power,
33:15which was also talked about a lot at that time.
33:18It must be said.
33:19A lot, yes.
33:20At that time it was said a lot that Marcelo Macarrón was very linked to...
33:23That he was a blacksmith.
33:24Exactly.
33:25I think De La Sota was the governor at that time.
33:27At that time, yes.
33:28Of course, in Córdoba and others, to certain sectors linked to De La Sota.
33:31Well, a lot of this was talked about, a lot about it.
33:36So this data is also surprising because, again,
33:38if Zárate had been a perejil, which in fact he was,
33:41that then he was another perejil,
33:43how is it possible that no one, having known that he had a problematic relationship,
33:46it was not Dalmaso with the parker, nobody investigated?
33:50Because nobody wanted to investigate.
33:51Besides, notice that first, when it was about the lover,
33:54we were talking about a consensual relationship.
33:56Then, when it was about Gastón Zárate, it was already a sexual abuse.
34:00Of course.
34:01Then, when it was about Marcelo Macarrón coming, or the son,
34:04coming from another place, it became a consensual relationship again.
34:07And now it becomes a sexual abuse again.
34:08Now, there is something very important about what you just said, right?
34:10If the suspect, the next day, goes to the warehouse to make a purchase,
34:15how they look at him, even their own neighbors.
34:17There is something that has changed a lot since that year,
34:20which was the murder, until now, and that has to do with the social sentence.
34:23Yes, of course.
34:24Totally.
34:25At that time, let's say, it was the court, and at most it was the cover of a newspaper,
34:30it was talked about on a radio, on television.
34:33But I say, what happens now, with social networks,
34:36with the newspaper on your phone, that there is the image, the image, the image.
34:39Let's say, if this man becomes the innocent,
34:42he will really be suspected throughout his life.
34:45Absolutely.
34:46Well, that's why it seemed to me, it caught my attention,
34:50and here I add Mario, you who have a lot of experience again.
34:53I say, yesterday, the prosecutor Jávega, when he gives the name,
34:57tells the information in some way, exposes him to this man.
35:02I say, well, what a complicated and atypical situation, right?
35:06Because the truth is that we don't have more elements.
35:09Look, there are people out there who say, no, this is enough for me.
35:12I say that he is the murderer, and that's it.
35:14And it is valid too, but I say, a problematic situation is generated.
35:19Yes, this new Cotejo generates a high probability
35:24that this new suspect, with the addition of these evidence and evidence,
35:30is the culprit.
35:31Now, not at all, by themselves, they cannot legitimize the guilt
35:37and that he does not end up being another victim of all this, as you well said.
35:42This case, from the outset, was related to power,
35:46and with political and economic power,
35:48and I think that it was directly sought on that side.
35:53If it had been investigated as a common and ordinary case,
35:56surely all these possibilities would have been shuffled,
36:00and from there, if this is really true,
36:03it would have been approved in the first year of investigation,
36:07and perhaps the culprit is this prisoner.
36:09But there is a reality.
36:10Yes, Cesar.
36:11A sexual relationship that we do not know if it is consensual or not.
36:14But yes, there was a murder that was not premeditated,
36:17and that was carried out with that conduct.
36:19That is very important.
36:20We cannot stop so much either.
36:21And I asked the question, Mario, on purpose,
36:23before I asked the question about consent,
36:25which is always a very problematic field.
36:28Sometimes the law, the judicial power,
36:30does not really get to dominate the situation.
36:32No, no, of course.
36:33Consent, because well, it is difficult,
36:36and because human relations and sexual relations
36:38are always very complex.
36:40But I say it above all because we have to stop
36:42when it was murdered.
36:43It does not matter in any case if it is a sexual relationship,
36:46because the sexual relationship could have been consensual,
36:48because at that moment he painted it,
36:50let's say it in Criollo,
36:51but in no way did he plan,
36:53it was not Dalmasot, to end up murdered.
36:55No, of course not.
36:56But the other thing that I ...
36:57Exactly.
36:58Maybe, Mario, you who are very involved in the case,
37:02do you think that the prosecutor,
37:04with this public imputation that he makes of someone
37:07to whom he will not be able to prove the imputation itself,
37:10is looking for some kind of legal artillery
37:15to see if he can get to something?
37:17Because it is really unusual,
37:19because you could even ...
37:21Let's see, I become a lawyer,
37:23I am a lawyer, well, look,
37:24they are imputing this to me,
37:25they can't prove me one thing or the other.
37:27Speaking in Criollo,
37:30Of course.
37:31Of that, for the moral damage you are causing me.
37:34You don't let me prove anything at all
37:36and you are imputing a murder.
37:37I make a small parenthesis
37:38and Mario is going to answer César.
37:40The family's lawyers have already declared
37:43that they will do everything possible
37:45so that it is investigated.
37:46Of course.
37:47That they are going to go to the last court in the country,
37:50to the Supreme Court.
37:51That's why I tell you that you can ...
37:52Trying to ...
37:53At 20 years old.
37:54But everything indicates that they will not be able to.
37:55Of 131.
37:56But everything indicates that they will not be able to.
37:58A parallel investigation from the outside.
38:00Let's say, that's why we talk about social issues too, right?
38:02No.
38:03How do you subject him,
38:04involuntarily, to a parallel investigation?
38:06No.
38:07No.
38:08They could do ...
38:09Well, there is a lot of talk about the truth trials.
38:11I don't think so.
38:12Yes, that's all.
38:13And this comes in.
38:14It's controversial.
38:15But I don't know if this comes into a truth trial.
38:16Yes, sorry Mario, you were going to talk.
38:17This took a long time.
38:19And what's more, it was at the Macaroni trial
38:22when the cause for everything was prescribed,
38:24except for him.
38:25How was it?
38:26I think it was like to give a gold rush.
38:28And what's more, he was very close to being sentenced,
38:31unfairly, surely, now seeing this.
38:34But there is a reality.
38:36When he is absolved,
38:39I think it was like a consolation prize.
38:42It is decreed there that it was necessary to continue investigating for the truth.
38:46That is, not for justice, but for the truth.
38:48And as they said before,
38:50if there were pending causes,
38:52the prescription would stretch,
38:55but apparently not.
38:57I think the mistake,
38:59Prosecutor Jávega, whom I don't know,
39:02but we were very close friends,
39:04he worked with me for a long time.
39:06I think that when this happened,
39:07Prosecutor Jávega, I don't know if he was in the judicial power,
39:10I don't even know if he was a lawyer,
39:11I met him now,
39:12but they have commissioned this,
39:14and it must be a very heavy burden.
39:16He did a great job.
39:17He did an extraordinary job.
39:19It was a job that everyone should have done before,
39:21at the time.
39:22To have considered all the possibilities.
39:24No, no, that's not what I'm questioning, Mario.
39:26What I'm saying is that in its efficiency,
39:29perhaps he is speculating with some kind of pressure,
39:32even at the judicial level,
39:34to find what we lawyers say,
39:38that is the gap through which I can continue in this cause.
39:42Surely.
39:43Surely.
39:44And you know that in all these cases,
39:46there has been a media, public pressure,
39:49and we all want justice or truth,
39:53whether it is true or false.
39:55It is really, Mario, very sad.
39:57But in these things, you know.
39:58Very sad what has happened in this cause.
40:00Sincerely, because it has come to a result
40:02that we do not know if it is correct,
40:04it is not correct.
40:05The truth is that it has been a shame,
40:07and it was acted very, very badly.
40:08Thank you, Mario.
40:09A big hug.