0102001625JP111012252 copia defensa

Reanuda la Presentación

Introducción del Testigo

• Se reanuda la presentación a las 14:51, con el testigo María de Jesús Avaldés llamado a declarar.

• Se le recuerda al testigo su obligación de decir la verdad y las consecuencias legales de falsedad ante la autoridad, según el artículo 333 del Código Penal del Estado de Veracruz.

Procedimiento Judicial

• El testigo protesta para conducirse con verdad y se le instruye sobre cómo responder preguntas, especialmente si escucha la palabra "opresión".

• Se confirma que no tiene parentesco con el acusado antes de que inicie su declaración.

Experiencia Profesional del Testigo

Trayectoria en Fiscalía

• María de Jesús trabaja en la Fiscalía General del Estado en servicios periciales desde hace 15 años.

• Posee una licenciatura en psicología y se especializa en emitir dictámenes y valoraciones psicológicas para víctimas de delitos.

Métodos de Evaluación Psicológica

• Realizó un peritaje sobre un adolescente utilizando diferentes pruebas proyectivas, incluyendo el test del síndrome depresivo y dibujos proyectivos como "persona bajo la lluvia".

• La evaluación reveló un puntaje que indica depresión media, basado en un cuestionario estructurado con cuatro escalas: normal, ansiedad, depresión media y grave.

Detalles del Caso Evaluado

Hechos Denunciados por el Adolescente

• El adolescente reportó dos incidentes: uno ocurrido en mayo de 2024 donde fue agredido sexualmente por su instructor Salvador Palafox durante una práctica escolar.

• En junio también ocurrió otro incidente similar; el adolescente expresó que no había relación sentimental entre ellos y describió cómo se sentía incapaz de gritar durante los ataques.

Impacto Emocional

• La víctima manifestó que estos eventos afectaron su deseo de asistir a la escuela debido a la presencia constante del agresor durante los ensayos.

Observations from the Victim's Test

Emotional State and Psychological Assessment

• The test revealed various emotional issues in the victim, including insecurity, low self-esteem, pressure, and feelings of threat.

• Another assessment method used was a drawing test involving a tree, a house, and a person to evaluate the victim's emotional state.

• The drawings indicated signs of withdrawal, rejection, adaptation difficulties, sexual concerns, and overall insecurity.

Conclusions Drawn from Assessments

• The expert concluded that there is evidence of psychological damage due to the events described by the victim during an interview.

• Despite questioning about possible romantic feelings towards her instructor Salvador Palafox, the victim expressed total rejection and distrust towards him.

• The expert dismissed any notion of romantic involvement based on consistent responses indicating no affection or acceptance from the victim.

Environment of Insecurity

• The expert noted an environment filled with distrust; the victim was reluctant to attend school due to her teacher being present there.

• It was confirmed that this sense of insecurity significantly impacted her willingness to engage in educational activities.

Need for Psychological Therapy

• Based on reported symptoms related to sexual contact and trauma experienced by the victim, therapy was deemed necessary for recovery.

• A recommendation for psychological treatment was made specifically tailored for minors who have experienced abuse.

• It was emphasized that therapy should be conducted by a female psychologist due to trust issues stemming from past experiences with male figures.

Methodology Used in Evaluation

• The expert confirmed using specific methodologies and techniques while preparing their report regarding the assessments conducted on the minor.

• Clarification sought whether they reviewed written accounts provided by the minor during investigations; however, confusion arose regarding understanding questions posed.

Expert Testimony and Document Verification

Recognition of the Expert's Report

• The expert confirms that they conducted multiple tests, specifically three, and included a projection in their report. This is acknowledged as true.

• The expert states that their signature and the written content are how they recognize their report. They emphasize familiarity with the victims involved.

Clarifications on Victim Interaction

• The expert visited the victim only once for the purpose of creating this report, which lasted approximately one hour. They confirm recognition of their own document if presented to them.

• A request is made to present the witness with a copy of the expert's report to clarify where specific writings were added by a minor during an interview.

Issues with Document Completeness

• There are concerns raised about missing parts in copies provided by defense counsel; it appears some sections of the expert's report may not have been included in these copies.

• The defense notes discrepancies between documents received from public prosecutors and those submitted by them, indicating potential issues with completeness or accuracy in documentation.

Examination of Evidence Presentation

• During proceedings, there is a request for clarification regarding which part of the expert’s report is being referenced as incomplete or missing when shown to witnesses. This highlights ongoing verification efforts within legal processes.

• An assertion is made that one section of the document does not appear in photocopies provided by defense counsel, suggesting possible errors in document handling or submission procedures.

Discussion on Content Inclusion

• Questions arise regarding whether handwritten notes or drawings made by a minor during interviews were included in the final report prepared by the psychologist; it becomes clear that certain elements may not have been documented as claimed.

• The psychologist clarifies that while some tests were included in their assessment, specific drawings created during interviews were not incorporated into their official documentation despite being discussed during questioning sessions.

Transcript Summary Legal Proceedings and Interrogation Dynamics

Examination of the Dictamen

• The questioning begins with a reference to a section on reasoning included in the dictamen, prompting the witness to identify its location within the document.

• The witness confirms that this section is on the second page, which is not available to the interrogating party.

Context of Interview

• Clarification is sought regarding whether the interview or dictamen was conducted at the Ministry's premises, with an emphasis on legal protocols for child protection as outlined by a Supreme Court protocol from February 2012.

Legal Framework Discussion

• A discussion arises about Article 373 of the National Code of Criminal Procedure, highlighting that while it has been referenced, it has undergone amendments affecting interrogation practices.

• The defense argues for their right to ask questions beyond those posed by public prosecutors, citing changes made in June 2016 that allow for broader inquiry during cross-examinations.

Objections and Counterarguments

• The defense requests permission to continue questioning despite not having previously asked certain questions to public prosecutors, arguing against limitations imposed by prior interpretations of legal articles.

• An objection from social representation emphasizes that cross-examination should be limited strictly to what has been presented by public prosecutors.

Final Arguments and Legislative Intent

• The defense reiterates their stance based on legislative changes aimed at expediting proceedings and ensuring comprehensive interrogation based on existing investigation records rather than solely relying on prosecutor information.

• The jurisdictional body acknowledges these arguments but maintains focus on procedural adherence as per established norms while allowing further questioning related to child protection protocols mentioned earlier.

Interrogation Protocols and Psychological Assessments

Understanding the Role of Protocols in Interventions

• The speaker questions the knowledge of a protocol used for interventions, emphasizing its importance in guiding actions during psychological assessments.

• Inquiry into whether the interview environment adhered to protocol standards, specifically regarding privacy and emotional safety for the victim.

• The witness is asked to confirm if the interview setting was indeed private and secure as per protocol requirements; they struggle to provide a clear answer.

Interview Process and Psychological Tools Used

• The age of the minor at the time of interview is confirmed as thirteen, with an emphasis on using various techniques to ensure comfort during information extraction.

• Clarification sought on who assisted during the interview process; it’s noted that only specific professionals were involved according to protocol guidelines.

• Discussion about psychological instruments employed during evaluations, including specific tests like "the person under rain test," which are intended to assess emotional states.

Evaluating Psychological Impact

• Questions arise regarding how conclusions about psychological characteristics are drawn from tests, highlighting concerns over their validity based on limited context.

• Emphasis on diverse methodologies in psychology—tests, interviews, and behavioral observations—to arrive at comprehensive assessments of individuals' mental states.

Timeframes and Recording Procedures

• Discussion about time taken for various tests; no strict limits exist but averages suggest flexibility in assessment duration based on individual needs.

• A critical point raised regarding mandatory audio/video recordings during interviews as per protocols; confirmation reveals such recordings were not made.

Assessing Psychological Damage

• The witness concludes that the minor exhibits signs of psychological damage linked directly to her experiences; however, clarity is sought on general impacts of parental divorce on children.

• Further questioning leads to confusion around assessing potential psychological effects stemming from living conditions post-divorce.

Expert Testimony on Pedophilia Assessment

Evaluation of the Psychologist's Methodology

• The speaker emphasizes that their evaluation focuses solely on pedophilia, not considering broader contexts, and clarifies they are not a social worker. They question the psychologist's diagnostic approach.

• Inquiry into whether the psychologist reviews investigation files from the Public Ministry reveals that they do not have access to these documents, raising concerns about the thoroughness of their assessments.

• The psychologist states that their evaluations can take hours or up to a day, depending on availability and workload, indicating variability in assessment timeframes.

• A "diagnostic impression" is defined by the psychologist as a summary derived from test results and narratives; however, confidentiality protocols restrict sharing detailed findings with external parties like the Public Ministry.

• The discussion touches upon revictimization protocols and highlights that all psychological tests and narratives remain confidential within the psychology department.

Protocol Adherence and Methodological Concerns

• The psychologist acknowledges remembering protocol guidelines regarding victim interviews but admits to not using certain methodologies such as inductive reasoning during assessments.

• Clarification is sought regarding specific methods used in evaluations; it is confirmed that neither inductive nor analogical methods were employed in this case.

• The psychologist confirms their qualifications in general psychology but lacks formal specialization in child victims of sexual crimes despite having completed relevant training courses offered by authorities.

Understanding Psychological Techniques

• When questioned about familiarity with "Rapport Interviews," the psychologist admits ignorance of this technique, suggesting gaps in knowledge related to interviewing strategies for vulnerable populations.

• In response to questions about detecting deception during interviews, the psychologist affirms it is possible but refrains from providing specific criteria or techniques for identifying lies.

Bibliography and Evidence Review

• The testimony includes references to various bibliographic sources; however, when asked if one source discusses damage due to pedophilia specifically, the answer is negative.

Clarifications on Professional Role

• The witness explains their role as an expert only after initial assistance has been provided by multidisciplinary teams involved with minors who report abuse cases.

• There’s an emphasis on how clinical determinations regarding pedophilia are made based solely on investigated facts rather than family dynamics or other contextual factors affecting victims' vulnerabilities.

This structured overview captures key discussions surrounding psychological assessments related to pedophilia while highlighting methodological concerns raised during questioning.

Testimony and Evidence Handling in Psychological Assessments

Access to Psychological Records

• The witness states that only they have access to the psychological tests and written materials provided by the victim, emphasizing their responsibility for safeguarding these records.

• The witness explains that no one else, including police colleagues or prosecutors, can access these files due to confidentiality protocols maintained by state psychologists.

• When asked if they would present evidence if requested by any party, the witness confirms they would comply with such a request.

Legal Procedures and Requests

• The defense queries whether anyone had requested to view the psychological evidence; the witness responds negatively, indicating no requests were made.

• A question arises regarding the definition of "pederasty," which indicates a shift towards discussing legal terminology relevant to the case.

Clarifications on Terminology

• The witness is asked about their understanding of subjective terms used in their report. They confirm that "could" implies subjectivity in their assessments.

• After concluding questions from the prosecution, it is noted that there are no further inquiries from the jurisdictional body.

Witness Release and Court Proceedings

• The judge clarifies that a witness has left their position temporarily due to maintenance work being conducted in the courtroom but will return for proceedings.

Introduction of New Witnesses

• A new witness, Francisco Javier García Espinosa, is introduced. He is reminded of his obligation to tell the truth under penalty of law as per local statutes.

Expert Testimony Overview

• The court outlines potential penalties for providing false information during testimony, referencing specific articles from local penal codes.

• The new witness confirms he has no familial ties to any involved parties and has been working in forensic criminalistics for 37 years.

Criminalistics Expertise

• The expert details his extensive experience in various forensic areas including crime scene inspections and ballistic analysis.

Methodology in Criminalistic Reports

• He describes his approach to creating criminalistic reports which involves systematic observation and documentation through photography at crime scenes.

Criminalistics Report Overview

Initial Observations and Context

• The criminalistics report was conducted on March 6, 2025, at a secondary school named "Secundaria de la General" located in Nueva York, specifically on Mariano Matamoros street.

• A photographic sequence was taken outside the premises, initially capturing general views before focusing on specific areas inside the school.

Description of the Band Room

• The term "local" refers specifically to the band room within the school. Evidence included drums, cornets, and belts indicative of a band setup.

• The band room is described as a single-story structure with one access point and light-filtering grilles along the east wall.

Access and Layout Details

• Access to the band room is through a southern door; there are no windows present except for previously mentioned grilles.

• Questions arose regarding distances between rooms; clarity was sought on how far the band room is from adjacent classrooms.

Surrounding Areas and Security Features

• The defense highlighted ambiguity in questioning about classroom distances; it was clarified that multiple classrooms exist near the band room.

• No surveillance cameras were observed either inside or outside of the band room during inspections.

Sound Isolation Considerations

• It was noted that if external noise levels were high (e.g., during class), sounds from within could be indistinguishable due to ambient noise interference.

Methodology of Criminalistic Analysis

• The expert's report numbered 376 detailed techniques used: location identification, description, observation methods, and documentation processes.

Identification of School Type

• Confirmation that it is indeed a secondary school came from official documents provided by the prosecution indicating its designation as "Escuela Secundaria Lázaro Cárdenas del Río."

Accessing the School: Initial Steps

Permission to Enter the School

• The speaker discusses their arrival at the school on March 6, where they initially requested permission to enter.

• After receiving access from a teacher, the speaker sought an interview with the school director, explaining that their visit was for a field criminalistics investigation.

• Rubés granted access and provided assistance in locating the band room, indicating that their report is based on photographic evidence from the crime scene.

Clarifications and Objections

• A question arises regarding additional details in the speaker's report; however, objections are raised about its clarity.

• The fiscal representative questions how the location of Lázaro Cárdenas Secondary School was determined, leading to further objections about previous answers.

Locating the Crime Scene

Identifying Key Details

• The speaker reiterates knowledge of the city but confirms that official documents specified Lázaro Cárdenas Secondary School's address as Mariano Matamoros Street in Benostiano Carranza neighborhood.

Confirmation of Access Procedures

• The defense attorney seeks confirmation about whether permission was required to enter the school, which is affirmed by the speaker.

Further Inquiries and Testimonies

Interview Process Insights

• The defense attorney clarifies that upon arriving at Lázaro Cárdenas Secondary School, permission was indeed necessary before entry could be granted.

Observations Inside the School

• Questions arise regarding specific observations made within certain areas of the school; however, responses indicate limited awareness or acknowledgment of those details.

Conclusion of Testimony

Witness Release

• The witness concludes their testimony and is released from further questioning after confirming their identification.