Because they feel like talking about it a week, talking about the theme of the week.
Once I was handcuffed before a judge, an extraordinarily young for his position. I was lucky and I was wrong because, despite my total inexperience criminal declared reasonably well so I walked out of court along with three friends without more damage than an ugly statement in my file. Four other friends were in the same trance not so lucky and were prosecuted for possession and supply of estupefaccientes and sentenced to one to three years in prison. They had seized approximately 45 grams of marijuana, ie, a negligible amount. It was all they had between three and to take charge of their membership terminated incriminating each other by mistake.
lawyers, one public and one hired, were pale. They just could not believe it, could not believe that a court shall apply the maximum penalty for supply and possession in a first offense. First offense that was obviously not a case of traffic but just a group of young students, barely adults, who were vacationing in a remote resort that had been an insignificant amount of pot for personal use.
One of the lawyers, shaking with rage, he explained that the judge was making a substitution of summer, and wanted to score some prosecutions to give him a hard image to his superiors. Nothing more than that, and three types whose greatest criminal act had been so far playing football in the street went to prison with a penalty, which by luck (or rather because it came from wealthy families) was appealed, reviewed and minimized to a month a few weeks later, worthy of a robbery or takeover. As we waited outside the judge dismissed with a sentence similar to three other assholes that had been stolen underwear from a neighbor's tent to make a joke. Seven young people in jail for nothing, seven notes to a judge novel but "tough." Not bad for a substitution of a morning.
previous days had learned much about the police, that day I learned a lot about justice. I also learned to hate and wish for death and horror of others with an intensity that did not know.
(A few days ago a friend told me an identical case happened in Montevideo Rock 2, and rock this party democracy, only with a sadder end, while my friends were placed in relatively friendly Rocha prison, those she went straight to the casualty Criminal Libertad)
All this comes, of course, a suspense account processing counter Eduardo Zaindenstat for daring to say that if all judges were like the dubious judge Eguren , Uruguay would be a banana republic. For me Zaindenstat was very bad; banana republics are far more serious than Uruguay and does not deserve to be put as examples of corruption. A few days before the journalist Gustavo Escanlar had deserved a similar fate when he came to say, not as a journalist but as an interviewee, who Federico Fasano -that kind of Citizen Kane without grandeur that has become the self-proclaimed spokesman left while crushing any attempts to unionize their amarillísimo diary was a "son of a thousand whores," seem to share the opinion that almost all the people who worked for him.
Uruguayans have the usual thoughtless and coerced to believe in immortality and infallibility the judiciary without any real evidence of any of both. In fact it is the judiciary itself to pass a law unconstitutional and contrary to all international human rights treaties by which it saw as the amnesty law. It is the same judiciary that has tilted toward the direction in which the Executive is blowing for years, said the same res judicata if Bordaberry , the more obvious criminal crimes of all history of the country and but was never prosecuted for them.
The judiciary itself has exonerated traffickers caught in fragranti (but with good links in it), which has maintained totally irregular meetings with operators of the political apparatus in flirty coast clubs, whose prisoners without trial and without a process worthy of the name to about half the population of prisons, which voted itself an exception to the retirement pensions that was imposed on all other Uruguayan beyond what they had made in his working life, which kept all its members elected at-et de la dictatorship. The same one that put all the sticks in the wheels possible to lawyers during the same trying to defend the rights of prisoners, which still does not recognize the labor rights of hundreds of prisoners and exiles because of the dictatorship, who prosecuted four assholes graffiti for "sedition" under democracy, which he sent to the prison of Liberty, also in full democracy, a wretched singer who came up bawling "cagaremos us in parliament" in a song. The course has built a corporate relationship between prosecutors and judges who protect each other makes with the brutality that one would assume that should stand equal before it. The unquestionable. The judiciary itself. This guarantee, that sucks. Z
The case may have its good side, it is clear that for people all this was too much, too absurd. When is exempt from punishment for a group of evaders from about $ 50 million and is punished Who says that's not right, you can not talk about democracy, or freedom of speech, or of both simulations to which we are accustomed. No one can speak of nothing, which is too much for an administration with so little love for freedom like this. Journalists have been since the end of the dictatorship victims of extension through the laws of contempt, from shame and damage to reputation. Maybe now that the victim was a valuable pawn in the political apparatus, to a legislator comes to mind to leave such weapons of legal oppression of opinion in the hands of one person, whether a plaintiff or a judge, is an atrocity or absurd can this country forward.
hope that people realize the difference between talking and doing, and start opening their eyes about the monstrous bureaucratic apparatus of corporate power in the event that became the guarantor of our rights. If that occurs at least in part, then this may have been positive. Seek justice would be too.
0 comments:
Post a Comment