0102001625JP041009252 copia defensa

Reanudación de la Audiencia

Inicio de la audiencia

• La audiencia se reanuda a las 10 horas con 9 minutos tras un receso y corrección de fallas técnicas. Se cede el uso de la voz a la titular para continuar con la intervención de la defensa.

Desigualdad en el proceso

• Se menciona que los testigos son únicos y mutables, lo que genera un estado de desigualdad en el proceso judicial. Se critica que no se reconozcan adecuadamente los problemas existentes.

Argumentos sobre el respeto al gobernado

• La defensa argumenta que es esencial respetar y ayudar al gobernado procesado para que comprenda todas las acciones del juicio, haciendo referencia a una decisión relacionada con tráfico.

Intervención de la Fiscalía

Principio de contradicción

• La fiscalía responde a las manifestaciones previas, señalando que no asiste razón a la defensa, reafirmando su posición respecto al escrito de acusación presentado anteriormente.

Citación de testigos

• Se solicita al órgano jurisdiccional citar a los testigos necesarios para el juicio oral, enfatizando su importancia en el desarrollo del caso.

Manifestaciones adicionales

Solicitud para desechar manifestaciones

• La fiscalía solicita desestimar las manifestaciones realizadas por la defensa, argumentando que estas no tienen fundamento legal suficiente y deben ser rechazadas.

Respuesta del asesor jurídico

• El asesor jurídico se adhiere a lo manifestado por la fiscalía sin agregar más comentarios significativos sobre el caso actual.

Notificaciones y Procedimientos Judiciales

Imposibilidad de notificación

• Se establece que hubo dificultades para notificar a uno de los testigos clave, José René Reyes Hernández, lo cual fue discutido en audiencias anteriores. Esto afecta directamente el avance del juicio.

Aceptación del recurso planteado

• El órgano jurisdiccional acepta un recurso planteado por la defensa basado en vulneraciones percibidas respecto al principio de igualdad entre partes durante el proceso penal. Esto incluye referencias específicas al Código Nacional de Procedimientos Penales.

Carga probatoria y obligaciones

Obligación de presentar testigos

• La defensa argumenta que es responsabilidad de la representación social presentar testigos durante esta etapa procesal según lo estipulado por ley, destacando una posible falta en este aspecto por parte del tribunal.

Verificación del juez

• Se menciona que es durante la audiencia intermedia donde corresponde verificar si se cumplen las obligaciones legales relacionadas con pruebas y testimonios presentados ante el tribunal correspondiente.

Control Stage of Judicial Process

Responsibilities of the Judge

• The judge is required to verify that the prosecution cannot present witnesses, as argued by the defense, and must request the jurisdictional body to act accordingly. This is documented in a judgment opening order.

• Once this order is firm, it initiates the criminal process. If there are changes regarding witness availability during the trial, they must be addressed at that time.

Witness Notification and Responsibilities

• The judge emphasizes that the defense must present its witnesses by September, as established in prior hearings. The court noted difficulties in locating witness José René Reyes Hernández.

• It was recorded on August 13, 2025, that it was under strict responsibility of the defense to ensure their witness's appearance since no location could be confirmed for him.

Equality Between Prosecution and Defense

• There is no inequality in summoning witnesses between prosecution and defense; all prosecution witnesses were located at their provided addresses while defense witnesses were not.

• The judge acknowledges constitutional articles ensuring equal rights for both parties but insists these rights are contingent upon adherence to procedural codes.

Consequences for Non-compliance

• If the defense fails to justify a witness's absence, they will be considered withdrawn from participation. The judge maintains her previous ruling from September 9, 2025.

• The judge clarifies that it is indeed up to the prosecution to present its witnesses as per established norms; she does not have authority at this stage to alter this requirement.

Procedural Integrity and Diligence

• No debate has been opened regarding witness presentation due to procedural orders being followed correctly thus far.

• A diligence report dated August 8, 2025, indicates attempts made by officials to locate a witness at a specified address without success; further actions are mandated based on these findings.

• Despite efforts made by officials who found an unresponsive residence during attempts to notify a witness, there remains an obligation for public servants to ensure thoroughness in such notifications.

Procedural Updates in Legal Proceedings

Notification Procedures and Jurisdictional Instructions

• The court is instructed to partially revoke a previous order regarding the notification of parties involved, specifically Guadalupe and Jaira Patiño Vasquez, at their designated address. This is to ensure proper jurisdictional communication as per legal requirements.

• The assistant informs that they will resume discussions related to police notifications from the previous day, indicating ongoing procedural steps in the case.

Exhortation for Judicial Notifications

• The judge reiterates instructions based on national codes (articles 75, 76, and 77) to issue an exhortation to the judicial authority in Tamaulipas for notifying witnesses according to article 82 of the National Code of Criminal Procedure. This emphasizes adherence to legal protocols during notifications.

• It is mandated that attempts must be made multiple times at various hours to locate the witness at their residence, ensuring thoroughness in fulfilling notification obligations. If unsuccessful, a notice should be left at the door with further instructions for compliance.

Consequences of Non-compliance

• Witnesses are warned that failure to appear after being duly notified may result in fines amounting to 100 units as stipulated by article 104 of the National Code of Criminal Procedure. This serves as a deterrent against non-compliance with court orders.

• The court concludes this segment by confirming that all parties have been notified about these proceedings and any subsequent actions required from them moving forward. This ensures transparency and accountability among involved parties.

Discussion on Cautionary Measures

Request for Extension of Cautionary Measures

• A formal request has been submitted by the specialized prosecutor's office seeking an extension on cautionary measures imposed on Salvador Pala Fox Rodríguez due to ongoing legal proceedings which remain unresolved as of September 2025. This highlights concerns over continued risks associated with his case status.

• The prosecution argues that since there are still several hearings pending within this oral trial process, it is necessary to maintain existing precautionary measures until all aspects are fully adjudicated. They reference multiple other cases involving Salvador which necessitate careful consideration before lifting any restrictions placed upon him.

Legal Framework Supporting Requests

• Specific articles (153 through 170) from the National Code of Criminal Procedure are cited as justifications for extending these measures, emphasizing their relevance under current circumstances surrounding Salvador’s situation within multiple ongoing cases against him. This underscores a systematic approach towards maintaining judicial integrity while addressing public safety concerns during trials.

Defense's Position on Proportionality

• The defense raises questions regarding proportionality concerning extended cautionary measures; they argue that such extensions should not infringe upon rights without clear justification or necessity based on current evidence or circumstances presented in court proceedings thus far. Their stance reflects a commitment towards safeguarding individual rights amidst legal processes.

Fiscal Response and Justification

• In response, fiscal representatives assert that they have adequately justified their requests based on established legal precedents outlined previously; they emphasize adherence to statutory guidelines when imposing cautionary measures while also addressing potential risks posed by defendants awaiting trial outcomes.

Continuing with Precautionary Measures

Justification for Continuing Precautionary Measures

• The necessity to maintain precautionary measures is emphasized, referencing Article 155, which indicates that no effective measure can be imposed on Salvador Palafó Rodríguez from the specified catalog.

• Citing Article 167, the speaker discusses the grounds for imposing precautionary measures and highlights the risk of flight as outlined in Article 168, particularly concerning the nature of the crime involved.

Risks Associated with the Case

• There is a significant concern regarding potential obstruction of the investigation process and risks posed to victims, witnesses, or community members due to threats made by Salvador Palazzo Rodríguez against the victim. This is based on statements made by the victim herself.

• The speaker notes that both parties have access to an investigative file that has led to this oral trial; however, it appears that not all parties are fully aware of its contents.

Evidence Supporting Precautionary Measures

• Sufficient evidence exists within the investigative file for imposing precautionary measures, including victim testimony and medical reports detailing psychological evaluations indicating harm suffered by the victim. Thus, no alternative measure under Article 155 seems viable.

Court's Awareness and Procedural Fairness

• The court questions whether all parties are familiar with the investigative file and emphasizes fairness in proceedings without compromising any party's rights or guarantees during this process. It suggests a recess for further communication regarding procedural matters.

• The jurisdictional body expresses concerns about not having full knowledge of case details while ensuring equal treatment among all parties involved in this legal matter. This includes addressing issues related to representation and legal counsel present at this hearing.

Continuation of Proceedings

• A request was made for a break in proceedings so that necessary communications could occur between court officials and relevant authorities regarding representation at this hearing; ensuring no rights are violated during these discussions is paramount.

• The defense is reminded to speak clearly into their microphone as there were difficulties understanding previous statements due to unclear audio quality during proceedings; clarity is essential for accurate record keeping.

Final Remarks on Legal Representation

• The defense reiterates their position regarding procedural actions taken by public entities rather than individual parties at this stage; they stress that current representations should adequately protect victims' rights throughout these proceedings moving forward. Additionally, they highlight ongoing discussions about resuming hearings effectively while maintaining proper legal protocols as per national guidelines established in criminal procedure codes.

Continuation of the Hearing

Official Communication and Scheduling

• The assistant in charge is instructed to issue the corresponding official communication regarding the continuation of the hearing.

• The time set for resuming the hearing is 19:30 on this date, as per legal norms.

• Consideration of previous arguments presented by the defense plays a crucial role in determining this schedule.

• The current session is suspended at this moment, adhering to established regulations.

• This procedural step emphasizes adherence to legal protocols during hearings.