“`html
The Supreme Court has dismissed Marcos Thola Durán’s appeal, resulting in a life sentence for the murder of Silvia Vázquez Colque. This case has been resolved similarly to several others within the Rio Negro judicial branch, including rulings from the Superior Court of Justice.
The primary legal challenge in this case was the absence of the victim’s body. The court clarified that “special appeals arising from the rejection of the complaint are inadmissible (Article 280 of the State Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure).”
The conviction detailed that Thola Durán committed the murder between 10 PM on June 4, 2017, and 9 AM on June 5, 2017, in a location within the city of Viedma, where he killed his ex-partner, Silvia Vázquez Colque, and subsequently concealed her body to obstruct discovery.
According to the first-instance judgment, “it is illogical that Sylvia chose to end the separation when her mother temporarily visited the city where she and her family lived.”
The court noted that the lack of the victim’s body hindered the ability to gather conclusive evidence regarding the circumstances of her death. The delay between Silvia’s disappearance and the filing of the missing person report allowed for the potential destruction of evidence.
The trial court emphasized that the nature of the crimes was inhumane and cruel, highlighting the personal relationship between the victim and the perpetrator. The court remarked on the significant emotional harm inflicted not only on the victim but also on her descendants, who suffered from the absence of closure due to the missing body.
Rio Negro State STJ Decision in the Case of Silvia Colque
In 2021, the High Court rejected Tora Duran’s defense complaint, upholding the Court of Appeal’s decision which affirmed the life sentence for aggravated homicide linked to gender-based violence.
The STJ concluded that the defense’s arguments lacked merit, stating that the Court of Appeal’s comprehensive review addressed both factual and procedural legal issues, thereby reinforcing the Trial Court’s decision.
the STJ indicated that the defense failed to establish a significant federal issue, which warranted intervention by the nation’s highest court.
“`
html
case revolved around the admissibility of certain evidence and whether the due process was upheld during the initial trial. The defense argued that key testimonies were overlooked, which could have potentially influenced the jury's decision. However, the Supreme Court found that the lower courts had acted within the bounds of the law and that the evidence presented was sufficient to uphold the conviction.
Additionally, the Supreme Court's ruling signals a commitment to ensuring that justice is served in cases of violent crime, particularly those involving gender-based violence. This case highlights ongoing issues within the judicial system related to the treatment of such crimes and the rights of victims.
As a result of the Supreme Court's decision, the legal precedent established may impact future cases within the jurisdiction, stressing the importance of comprehensive and fair trials to maintain public trust in the judicial process.
