2024-11-25 03:15:00
Marcos Ariel Osuna, head of the case management department of Neuquen’s social planning bureau, is the only one of the 19 defendants who remains in preventive detention. On January 10th, he will have spent a year and a half in this state, The maximum limit allowed under the Criminal Procedure Codeso freedom corresponds to him.
However, they will most likely put him under house arrest like Ricardo Soiza and Néstor Pablo Sánz. They are the only three deprived of their liberty because a group of former defendants who are now witnesses – and nothing in this drama’s script is easy to follow, with an involuntary comedic step – say they are afraid of them.
Soysa, Sens and Osuna three of five alleged ringleaders An illegal association suspected of running a social program scam. The other two are former Social Development Minister Orlando Abel di Luca and former Coordination Director Thomas Siegenthaler.
Oral trial date?
Risking an appointment for an oral trial is very dangerous. The last action in the file comes from the defender: They presented their evidence. Not all; for example, Gustavo Palmieri (Sanz and his partner Isabel Montoya) is missing; Cecilia Farnesi (Juri O’Arteaga) and Pablo Gutierrez (Siegenthaler, Laura Reznik and Julieta Oviedo).
There are challenges and appeals to be resolved; if all goes well – which is difficult – one might wonder Trial in April, maybe May.
marcos osuna character
Osuna is the only one of the five suspected ringleaders He has public defense rights and lives in a welcoming neighborhood. What he has trouble explaining is why he has millions of pesos in his bank account, a lot of Transfer from bookmaker. Lucky player?
There are several facts to the prosecution’s allegation. For example, “he cashed 29 checks for a total amount of 1,379,300 pesos,” which he then “delivered to Sanz or to Ricardo Soyza.”
Osuna is also one of the coordinators of a group of “extractors” who visit ATMs and empty the savings accounts of social program beneficiaries.
burst extraction
The charges explain: “The extractor received someone else’s debit card and its corresponding PIN to use Those who organized the evacuation, namely: Sanz and Osuna. This occurs on the collection date, usually at the end of each month. After receiving multiple financial cards, the defendant went to ATMs located in the city of Neuquén and surrounding areas and was responsible for withdrawing cash using debit cards belonging to other people (the beneficiaries).
«They arrive at the ATM and insert their debit cards multiple times until they withdraw the total amount for each account, usually $49,500. After getting the cash, “This group of extractors submits it to the Social Planning Agency before Sens, Osuna or Soysa.”.
They also accuse him of “taking advantage of his position as head of the project management unit to send “parallel lists of supposed benefits to the General Administration (first under Luis Gallo and later under Laura Reznik)” Certifications and checks made by people have appeared.
«Like his teammate Sanz, Osuna He also carried out Soysa’s direct orders. He enforces these rules through his employees. He was also responsible for coordination and logistics to recruit so-called beneficiaries. “He then arranged for employees to cash checks issued by the General Administration and withdraw debit cards so they could withdraw cash at ATMs.”
Electronic anklets and bracelets
public defense He is already preparing to ask for freedom Since the maximum period of preventive detention has been reached and in a subsidiary manner, he will request house arrest.
You must provide the property with an appropriate social and environmental report. Assuming they will agree, Comes with electronic anklet Like Soysa and Sanz, the police patrol took them by surprise.
1732513130
#Neuquens #social #program #scam #inmate #Osuna #home #care
How does witness fear affect the judicial process in high-profile fraud cases like that of Marcos Ariel Osuna?
**Interview with Legal Expert on Neuquén Social Program Scam Case**
**Date: November 25, 2024**
**Interviewer: Maria Lopez**
**Guest: Dr. Javier Fernández, Criminal Law Scholar**
**Maria Lopez:** Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Fernández. Today, we are discussing the ongoing case in Neuquén involving Marcos Ariel Osuna and the alleged social program scam. As of now, Osuna remains in preventive detention while other defendants have been released or placed under house arrest. Can you explain the significance of his continued detention?
**Dr. Javier Fernández:** Thank you, Maria. Osuna’s continued preventive detention is significant for a couple of reasons. Firstly, under the Criminal Procedure Code, he is approaching the maximum limit for preventive detention—specifically, a year and a half. His case raises questions about legal rights and procedural fairness. While he is entitled to freedom under such circumstances, the court often considers the potential risk he poses to witnesses and the community, which is why alternative measures like house arrest may be instituted.
**Maria Lopez:** Interesting. What complicates the situation further is the fear among some former defendants who are now witnesses. How does this influence the judicial process?
**Dr. Javier Fernández:** It complicates things significantly. When witnesses express fear of the defendants, it raises concerns about the integrity of the testimony they may provide. This can lead to additional protective measures for witnesses and can affect how the trial is structured. In this case, Osuna and two other alleged ringleaders are implicated in a way that makes their influence on witnesses a key issue for the prosecution.
**Maria Lopez:** You mentioned the alleged financial activities, including large sums of money and cashing checks. How does this financial evidence play into the charges against Osuna?
**Dr. Javier Fernández:** The prosecution’s financial evidence is crucial in establishing not only the existence of an illegal association but also the manner in which Osuna and the others are accused of exploiting social program beneficiaries. The claims that Osuna cashed 29 checks totaling over a million pesos and then transferred those funds to his co-defendants suggest a level of organization and intent to defraud. Such financial documentation strengthens the case against him and illustrates the mechanics of the alleged scam.
**Maria Lopez:** It’s stated that Osuna is one of the coordinators orchestrating activities involving “extractors” using the beneficiaries’ bank cards. Could you elaborate on how this aspect of the case unfolds in legal terms?
**Dr. Javier Fernández:** Absolutely. The concept of “extractors” receiving debit cards and PINs from beneficiaries indicates a methodical approach to the fraud. Legally, this can constitute multiple offenses: conspiracy, fraud, and even identity theft. If the prosecution can convincingly link these activities back to Osuna as an organizer, it not only elevates the charges against him but can also lead to more severe penalties. The case exemplifies how organized crime can infiltrate even social safety nets.
**Maria Lopez:** With an oral trial potentially scheduled for April or May of next year, what challenges do you foresee for the defense and prosecution?
**Dr. Javier Fernández:** Both sides face significant hurdles. The defense may struggle with the weight of the evidence presented and the apprehension of witnesses, while the prosecution must ensure that all their evidence is complete and robust. There are likely to be challenges and appeals that could delay proceedings, but if handled judiciously, both parties could mount compelling cases that impact the trial’s outcome.
**Maria Lopez:** Thank you, Dr. Fernández, for your insights on this complex case. We will continue to follow the developments closely.
**Dr. Javier Fernández:** Thank you for having me, Maria. It’s a critical case that underscores the importance of accountability in public service.