The singer had an accident with his representative due to the rain. Neither of them was injured.
The cumbia singer L-Gante He had an accident with his truck when he was on his way to a television interview, a week after his conviction became known. His entourage assured that he is in good health, while those who saw him enter the study pointed out that “I was shocked and scared.”
The musician was coming this Monday in his truck along with his representative when, due to the rain, he lost control and overturned: He turned twice, fell into the ditch.
Behind him, in his car, was his lawyer. Nicolás Payarola, who upon seeing the accident approached to help the artist. There he verified that he was fine, and it was L-Gante himself who He asked him to take him to the canal so he could make the note that was planned.
Then, the singer arrived at the studio around 10:30 “in a state of shock,” dialogue less than 10 minutes with Carmen Barbieri, who hosts the program very morning in The Thirteen.
Meanwhilethe vehicle was left at the place where the accident occurred with police officers and their representative.
L-Gante was sentenced to three years in suspended prison
He verdict against the singer Elian Valenzuelabetter known as L-Ghent, It was known this Monday on the last day of the oral trial that follows him in the courts of Mercedes after being accused of “illegitimate deprivation of liberty, aggravated by the use of firearms”, a fact for which the prosecutor in the case, Adrián Landini, He asked for 7 years in prison. Finally, Judge Ignacio Racca decided to acquit the singer of said accusation. On the other hand, they blamed him for the crime of threatening 3 and a half years of suspended prison.
L-Gante’s defense achieved its main objective: for the judge to dismiss the accusation of illegal deprivation of liberty against Valenzuela’s friend. Daniel Emanuel “Muelita” De Marco. It was key that the prosecutor in the case did not accuse him of that crime.
He was also acquitted of drug possession. In this case, the judge argued that the amount did not suggest that it was not for personal consumption.
Source: Ambito
