This is the case of former aviator Domingo D’Agostino, sentenced in 2017 to life imprisonment for twelve homicides in the case of crimes within the ESMA. The prosecutor requested his immediate transfer to a prison.
The head of the Fiscal Unit that intervenes in the processes for crimes against humanity in the area of the Naval Mechanics School, Felix Crousrequested the Federal Criminal Court No. 5 of Buenos Aires that the former pilot of the Naval Prefecture Alejandro Sunday D’Agostinosentenced in 2017 to life imprisonment for his involvement in 12 murders of people thrown into the sea from airplanes in 1977be sent to serve his sentence in a penitentiary for having violated on ten occasions in the first half of this year the rules governing the house arrest he has enjoyed since November 28, 2012.
In his conclusion, the prosecutor noted that the sentence that D’Agostino must serve “is neither house arrest nor prison; merely a voluntary restriction of freedom of movement to preserve the name of those forms that no one keeps or makes keep. In plain language: house arrest is release from prison. And the sad thing is that the victims know it and suffer it.” In the epigraph of the ruling, the prosecutor had quoted the poet Homero Expósito: “No, it is not the sky nor is it blue.”
The presentation by the representative of the Public Prosecutor’s Office is the second in the same sense made in less than three months. On June 18, Crous argued that the former officer – who remains detained at his home with an electronic monitoring device – He recorded three departures on February 29 and May 6 and 23, which “were carried out without authorization and without prior or subsequent notice to the court.”
He added that “they were not due to urgent health reasons that could justify them, but rather they were departures for attending kinesiology, getting vaccinated and even more obvious, is the case of going to the bank“. He also highlighted that the convicted person himself is “the one who communicates with the Directorate of Assistance for Persons Under Electronic Surveillance (DAPBVE), which constitutes a serious irregularity, incompatible with the institution of house arrest”, given that this type of request must be made by his technical defense to the court in charge of executing the sentence.
The DAPBVE is an agency that depends on the Ministry of National Security and is in charge of controlling the devices used to enforce house arrest.
“In addition, the court ordered – in December 2022 and December 2023 – that monthly medical reports be submitted to account for the evolution of the accused, regarding the rehabilitation treatment he was undergoing for an operation […] carried out in 2021. To date There is not a single aggregated medical report and no record of the guardian proposed by the defense,” the prosecutor added.
The departures of the convicted ex-pilot
In the presentation made yesterday, prosecutor Crous detailed seven other occasions in which the accused violated house arrest. For each episode he used new documentation presented by the DAPBVE in the respective incident:
- On January 26, he left at 3:41 p.m. and returned at 4:42 p.m.
- On January 30, he left his home at 9:54 a.m. and returned at 11:39 a.m.
- On March 18, it left at 4:58 p.m. and returned at 6:28 p.m.
- On March 26, he left his home at 7:06 and returned at 10:26.
- On April 10, he left at 3:07 p.m. and returned at 5:10 p.m.
- On April 19, he left his home at 8:09 a.m. and returned at 10:41 a.m.
- On May 7, he left his home at 12:08 p.m. and returned at 2:54 p.m.
The prosecutor also indicated that, with each departure, the DAPBVE informed the court that the convicted person had left his home and that, in the last one, the court replied to that body that by order of one of the judges “the accused Randolfo Luis Agusti Scacchi” had been authorized to attend a medical appointment at the Naval Hospital. “As can be seen, the response refers to another accused in the case,” the prosecutor noted.
“According to the documentation submitted, on all these occasions, D’Agostino contacted the agency by telephone to report that the reason for his discharge was related to his health. However, there is no record in this incident of his defense requesting authorization, nor are there medical certificates to support his statements,” he added, and then emphasized that “it is extremely irregular that it is the accused himself who contacts the DAPBVE to report his discharges from home, since this circumstance is contrary to the nature and purpose of the control measure ordered.”
“The departures from the home reported by the DABVE not only do not fit into the assumptions established in the Court’s resolution and in the commitments assumed by D’Agostino, but they are also not those that could be justified without requesting prior authorization,” said the prosecutor, and recalled the rule of article 34 of law 24.660, of criminal enforcement, which establishes that “The competent judge will revoke house arrest when the convicted person unjustifiably violates the obligation to remain at the designated address.”
Source: Ambito
I am an author and journalist who has worked in the entertainment industry for over a decade. I currently work as a news editor at a major news website, and my focus is on covering the latest trends in entertainment. I also write occasional pieces for other outlets, and have authored two books about the entertainment industry.
