On April 3, the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ) ordered the Criminal Chamber to know a request so that the case for the murder of Melisa Palacios, which occurred in July 2021, moved to a court of greater risk.
When consulting with the Judicial Agency (OJ) on public hearing for the Criminal Chamber to listen to the arguments to resolve the change of court, the spokesman of the CSJ Ludvin Villalta reported that it was summoned for June 9, at nine in the morning.
The Prosecutor’s Office against the crime of femicide received a notification of the Regional Court of Chiquimula, citing prosecutors for the intermediate stage hearing on June 9. The appointment was suspended by the judge’s excuse.
At that hearing it would be defined if María Fernanda Bonilla and Luis Marroquín will face trial. However, prosecutors expect this stage to be known in a high -impact court, but the criminal chamber has not resolved its request. Bonilla would have had a friendship with the victim, while Marroquín was Bonilla’s bodyguard.
Until today, the Criminal Chamber had not notified the date where said requirement in oral hearing will be scheduled. “It is appropriate to indicate that, according to information collected by the Prosecutor’s Office, the situation of the lawyers of the accused is still updated,” said Edgar Gómez, one of the prosecutors in charge of the case.
This tactic, he says, has been common in the defendants, qualifying the constant change of lawyers as “a defense strategy.” Remember that it has been notified, at least, six lawyers since the case reached the courts.
“Since the petition was made, the situation of the defendants has varied with their defense lawyers because they have changed; they have even had a representation of the Criminal Public Defense Institute,” added the prosecutor.
The risks
The main reason why the MP seeks that the case for the crime of Melisa Palacios is discussed in a high -impact court is due to “intimidation” scenarios that, he says, have suffered the parties involved in the case.
“The presence of armed subjects has been seen as an intimidating form, carrying long weapons, which constitutes an open intimidation. It is also feared for the safety of adhesive complainants, who have reported attacks and threats.”
The prosecutor emphasizes that two armed attacks have documented: one against the uncle and another against the victim’s mother, the latter who appears as an adhesive complainant.
With the highest risk transfer, the MP expects to have a safer scenario for audiences in Guatemala City, due to the location of judicures, which would avoid any risk scenario for the parties.
The case
On July 3, 2021, Melisa Palacios left her house saying that she was going to a friend’s birthday, when she actually met her friend and main defendant, María Fernanda Bonilla.
Security cameras captured the moment when Palacios entered a vehicle next to Bonilla and, later, sector cameras captured the vehicle route. Even the victim was with the same clothing that hours later was located lifeless, which increases the chances of the possible participation of Bonilla in the crime, according to prosecutors.
In addition to this monitoring, the MP has a witness who provided audios that reaffirm the hypothesis of prosecutors. “A witness received an audio where several claims that María Fernanda to Melisa, who begs for her life are heard.”
The judge who knew the case changed the crimes imputed to the defendants, of murder to homicide in a state of violent emotion. According to the MP, that crime does not correspond, since its means of investigation can demonstrate that Melisa Palacios was a victim of murder.