Horacio García Belsunce 2.jpg
Telam
The most categorical definition of the lawyer and journalist against the main defendant in this trial, was said after his statement, at the door of the San Isidro courts, when consulted by the press as to whether he was convinced that Pachelo (46) was the murderer of his sister, answered: “Yes”.
Dressed in a brown plaid suit, a matching scarf, a light blue shirt and a green tie, Horacio entered the mezzanine room of the San Isidro courthouse after 11:30 a.m. and the first thing he did when the prosecutors asked him about his sister was to mention her name. and pause.
“Maria Marta? First of all, I want to tell the court that this is not just any day, that I have been waiting for this day for almost 20 years to be able to say everything I have to say and so that the murder of my sister does not go unpunished.” “, said Horacio before the Oral Criminal Court (TOC) 4 of San Isidro.
“She is missed a lot, but I know that she is with me now,” he added, sitting in the same room where 11 years ago he was convicted as an accessory to the murder, but in 2020 he was dismissed, although now testifying as a witness.
Horacio García Belsunce.jpg
Telam
García Belsunce recalled that the first time he became aware of Pachelo was when his sister mentioned that she believed that neighbor had kidnapped his pet, the Labrador retriever “Tom”.
María Marta’s brother reported that when, on December 2, 2002, it was learned through the autopsy that his sister had been shot six times, “the name of Pachelo’s uncomfortable, annoying and delinquent neighbor came up again.”
He explained that at that time he was a “friend” of Roberto Ribas, if by friend we mean that with him he used to “play golf, have a little coffee in court and go to his house to eat, and when someone told him that the criminal was the lawyer de Pachelo asked for a meeting.
Nicolas Pachelo.jpg
Telam
“We met and without my having said anything to him, he told me: ‘There is a rogue there for whom I am a lawyer, Pachelo, a brave, complicated kid,’” he said.
“He asked me ‘how many shots does María Marta have?’ “I could have lowered the entire charger because he’s capable. It’s very strange because he didn’t call me. Anything I know I’ll call you,” and the meeting ended.”
After that meeting, García Belsunce assured that he met with the prosecutor Molina Pico, to whom he provided information about Pachelo and what the now accused did “before, during and after” that day inside Carmel.
“Who knows where the hell he took it (Molina Pico), I don’t know. We always maintained that this line had to be investigated,” he said.
María Marta’s brother assured that for 20 years there was always only one version and that, instead, Pachelo gave several such as that he was never in Carmel at that time or that he went to buy a toy at a mall in the Federal Capital, when The tests on the antennas of his cell phone showed that he was in Pilar and that three boys ran past him in the direction of his sister’s house.
Garcia Belsunce case.jpg
Telam
“The frames of a security camera see it at 6:59 p.m.,” he said about the time the defendant left Carmel on the day of the crime, and mentioned “the three boys who cross Pachelo jogging.”
“One of them continued in the direction of María Marta’s house, whom he sees arriving on a bicycle. He was the last person to see her alive,” he said.
The witness pointed directly to the investigation carried out by Molina Pico, and opined: “Given the possibility of losing his career, he said that the family deceived him.”
“He puts (Carlos) Carrascosa as the murderer, the family accessories and begins to put together the evidentiary plexus to achieve his goal. Molina Pico is the great accessories to this murder,” he said.
The 11th hearing of the debate began with a statement by Pachelo’s defense in which he asked the court that the prosecutors communicate the witnesses of the day in advance, something that the Deputy Attorney General of San Isidro, Patricio Ferrari, responded to that the party had access to the list of witnesses.
The first witness of the day was the expert psychologist, Patricia Ferreyra, who analyzed Pachelo in the framework of the Federal Capital criminal case for which in 2005 he ended up convicted of a series of robberies in the houses of friends and acquaintances.
The specialist indicated that after a series of studies he carried out, “Pachelo reacted with intimidating, threatening words that he maintained throughout the evaluation.”
This afternoon the declaration of another sister of María Marta, María Laura García Belsunce, who acts in the case as a private victim, as well as the widower Carrascosa, was also awaited.
The fourth witness of the day will be another expert psychologist who analyzed Pachelo in that case in the Federal Capital in a report that concluded that the accused had a “psychopathic personality disorder.”
In this third debate that is being carried out for the crime, the prosecution aims to demonstrate that Pachelo killed María Marta with six bullets to the head when he surprised him robbing his house on October 27, 2002, and with the collaboration of former security guards. .