The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

The Mexican Army resists collaborating in the investigation of the 'Ayotzinapa case'

2020-12-17T18:19:35.914Z


Despite the government's promise of transparency, the military dodged attempts to deepen the investigation of the attack against the students, according to sources consulted by EL PAÍS


The mother of a missing student with Mexican soldiers in 2019.Felix Marquez / AP

Two years after the change of government in Mexico, the investigations into the

Ayotzinapa case run up

against old obstacles, generating traffic jams that endanger the process.

After the successful discovery this year of the bone of one of the normalista students who disappeared in 2014, the first identified in six years, the Prosecutor's Office now points to one of the great taboos of the investigation: the role of the military.

In November, authorities detained a captain linked to the case.

The question now is whether the prosecution will be able to get to the bottom of the matter.

Despite the promises of transparency from the president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, investigators face difficulties in understanding the role that the Army played during the attack on normal school students.

Sources close to the investigation, consulted by EL PAÍS, point out that the requests for information made by the Prosecutor's Office to the Secretary of Defense in recent months have received silence for an answer.

Above all, "requests for access to documents that would help access the chain of command," these sources explain.

On the night of September 26 and early in the morning of September 27, 2014, police from Iguala, Cocula and other municipalities in that region of the State of Guerrero attacked a group of normalistas in various parts of Iguala.

The students had traveled to the municipality to catch buses from the local terminal and then go to a march in Mexico City.

The police officers acted in collusion with the criminal group Guerreros Unidos.

The reason remains unclear.

Until now, the idea was that the military had intervened marginally.

Bad, because they had not helped the boys, but without a specific responsibility in the attack.

Now, the prosecution doubts the scope of their action.

The investigators are targeting "about 30 soldiers among those who were in Iguala and the chain of command," according to the sources previously cited.

Among the 30 are Generals José Rodríguez, head of the Iguala battalion in 2014, and Alejandro Saavedra, in charge of the military zone of the State of Guerrero.

Already in 2015, the group of experts that the Organization of American States (OAS) sent to Mexico to investigate the case insisted on investigating the Army.

The experts made three points.

First, the journey and motivations of the military who acted on the ground at key times.

Second, the communications of the troops and the officers with the commanders, and the level of knowledge that the latter had of the attack.

And third, the possible links between the soldiers of the Iguala battalion and Guerreros Unidos.

The soldier arrested in November, Captain José Martínez Crespo, 49, is one of the elements that patrolled Iguala that night.

Crespo commanded a group of soldiers who were at two key points, the intersection of Juan N. Álvarez street, the Periférico ring road and the Barrandilla headquarters of the Iguala police.

In the first, Iguala agents carried out the first attack, leaving students dead and missing.

The soldiers later arrived at that scene, according to their own statements.

The second is part of one of the most controversial episodes of the case.

The Barandilla police station is a small detention center for the local police.

Over the years, several witnesses, including police officers, alleged members of Guerreros Unidos, students and residents of Iguala, have indicated that some of the 43 disappeared students were taken there after the attack in Juan N. Álvarez and Periférico.

The group would be greater than 10 boys, even up to 16, according to testimonies.

Despite not saying it in his first two statements, Crespo ended up admitting that he passed there.

The question to be clarified is whether the students were already at the Railing when he and the other soldiers arrived.

In his third statement, given in September 2015, Crespo said that he passed through the detention center at 00.55 on September 27.

That he arrived and asked about a requisitioned motorcycle from a colleague, a soldier who that night had been busy in surveillance tasks in Iguala.

Crespo said that the head of the police station, the judge of the Barandilla, Ulises Bernabé, pointed out that the motorcycle was not there.

The military left immediately, without checking anything.

It took five minutes.

The version of Bernabé is very different.

In his statement as a witness to the investigators in 2014, he pointed out that Crespo actually arrived at 11:30 p.m. and searched the facilities, always with the excuse of the motorcycle, for about 15 minutes.

Bernabé never said that the police had taken students there, but several sources close to the case, on the side of the families of the 43 and the presidential commission that supervises the investigations, point out that Bernabé should testify again.

"His testimony is key to understanding whether the military would have committed a crime of forced disappearance," said one of the sources consulted.

Bernabé fled to the United States years ago, where he requested and obtained political asylum.

Two witnesses point to Crespo

Crespo's arrest illustrates, on the one hand, the prosecution's attempts to deepen the Army's role in the case and, on the other, the difficulties that this implies.

There is no witness that places the military man and the students, at the same time, in the Railing.

For this reason, the Prosecutor's Office cannot accuse him of enforced disappearance.

His confinement is due to an accusation for a crime of organized crime.

Two witnesses accuse him of being part of the Guerreros Unidos network.

Until now, the testimony of a protected witness whom the Prosecutor's Office has called Juan, an old acquaintance of the criminal networks of the region, has been known.

With the changing of the guard in the government and the prosecution, Juan approached the investigators and declared that Crespo and his boss, Colonel José Rodríguez, commander of the Iguala battalion, worked with the criminal network.

His testimony was key to getting the captain arrested.

In the case of Colonel Rodríguez, who has already been promoted to general, the only accusation is that of Juan, hence his arrest has not taken place.

In the case of Crespo there is more evidence.

First, the testimonies of the students who interacted with him on the night of the events.

Surviving normalistas denounced that Crespo intimidated them in a hospital near the stage of Juan N. Álvarez.

In addition, there is a second testimony that directly incriminates him with Guerreros Unidos.

This is an alleged member of the criminal network, detained in Querétaro in 2017. This person stated that “a military man named Crespo” was at the home of Marco Antonio Vega, one of the group's founders, on several occasions.

Crespo would have received money from Vega.

This witness also points out that Crespo and another military man used official vehicles to transfer Guerreros Unidos weapons.

The blankets and the lawyers

In October 2014, a banner appeared in Iguala with a message signed by El Gil.

Designated as the operative responsible for Guerreros Unidos on the night of the attack against the students, Gildardo López,

El Gil

, was arrested in 2015 and then released in 2019 due to lack of evidence.

It was never known if El Gil was behind the message, but the amount of information prompted prosecutors to incorporate its content into the investigation.

The message pointed to the chiefs of police from Taxco, Huitzuco, Tepecoacuilco and other municipalities in the region of being part of the Guerreros Unidos network.

Also to its mayors.

It so happens that several of the chiefs of police in the towns of the region had previously been military men.

Among them, the Tepecoacuilco police chief, José Guadalupe Salas;

the one from Iguala, Felipe Flores;

that of Cocula, César Nava, and also those of Apaxtla and Taxco.

In addition to the police, the text of the message mentioned federal officials in the region and two soldiers, a captain and a lieutenant, named Crespo and Barbosa.

Despite the age of the accusations against Crespo, only now has proceeded against him.

Also in his case, the Ministry of Defense has tried to evade justice.

The prosecution accuses him of a serious crime: organized crime.

But the Army has made a platoon of lawyers available to the captain, including Jorge Alfredo Rico, who years ago assisted the military involved in the Tlatlaya massacre in the State of Mexico.

There are a total of five lawyers from the military public defense who make up the team that assists Crespo.

In the environment of the defense of the families of the 43 students, this behavior has been strange, since it is not usual for military defense lawyers to participate in legal proceedings against colleagues accused of such crimes.

Lawyers enter into cases of crimes provided for in the code of military justice, but not in civil matters.

The Prosecutor's Office plans to challenge the appointment of these lawyers.

Without being entirely serious, Crespo's defense symbolizes the attitude of the Army in the

Ayotzinapa case

.

Six years after the attack and the forced disappearance of the 43 students, the prosecution of Crespo and the rest of the military men identified as having ties to Guerreros Unidos could be key to understanding the size and dynamics of the criminal network.

Also, obtaining documents from the Ministry of Defense that depict the actions of the commanders during the night of the attack.

Time is running out on investigators.

Source: elparis

All news articles on 2020-12-17

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-27T16:45:54.081Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.