Beatriz de Vicente, a lawyer and criminologist, was direct about the life sentence Daniel Sancho received in Thailand. The collaborator of public mirror highlighted the defense of the son of actor Rodolfo Sancho. “The highlight for any defense lawyer is the day when the person who led the investigation testifies and no one asks questions. “The lawyer was looking for grapes.” De Vicente, who was with Sancho in Thailand, assured that his intention “is not to criticize any teammate” but that it is based on what he experienced in the Asian country and what he saw during the trial. In addition, Carmen Balfagón, one of Sancho’s Spanish lawyers, appeared on Antena 3, but Beatriz dre Vicente refused to speak to her live: “I’m not going to enter a circus with this lady.”
Spaniard Daniel Sancho has been sentenced to life in prison for the premeditated murder of Colombian surgeon Edwin Arrieta and two other crimes he was accused of, according to the sentence read this morning by a Thai judge. Sancho initially confessed to the crime to police, but later claimed during the trial that Arrieta’s death was the result of an accident during a fight. The judge found Sancho guilty of the victim’s death and dismemberment.
With this information, they opened all the Spanish news programs and in Public mirror (Antenna 3) Present was lawyer and criminologist Beatriz de Vicente, who visited Daniel Sancho in the Thai prison and was present for three days of the trial.
“The sentence was expected”
De Vicente began his speech by highlighting the defense of Daniel Sanchos, led from Spain by lawyers Marcos García Montes and Carmen Balfagó: “The sentence was expected. The public prosecutor had prepared its position with force. The proof was incontrovertible. Not to mention that initial statement that, by chance, Daniel Sancho’s lawyers denied and which is precisely the one that saves him from the death penalty because it is recognized as a mitigating circumstance. What was not expected is that it was not a conviction. In the end, it makes you a little sad because I remind you that, when this kid is arrested, the first lawyer he hires comes from a law firm in Thailand specialized in defending Spaniards detained there and hires a leading Thai criminal lawyer who. proposes what any colleague in Spain would have proposed in a situation like this: acknowledge the facts, reach an agreement, pay the family and this boy would have had a reduced sentence. We are now sentenced to life. I am not someone to say that it was not a good defense, but I saw a strong and effective accusation and a defense that I would have exercised differently.
Beatriz de Vicente refuses to speak with Daniel Sancho’s lawyer
At that point, Carmen Balfagón, one of Daniel Sancho’s Spanish lawyers, came on the phone and said, among other things: “I don’t know what’s going to happen and what prison he’s going to go to. We’re going to exhaust the possibilities of both resources. Let’s see what happens with the resources. We made the best possible defense. “What the defense attorney said doesn’t interest me.”
When Beatriz de Vicente was asked if she had anything to say to Balfagón, the host of the talk show Espejo Público replied: “I am not going to establish a dialogue with Mrs. Balfagón neither on the phone nor on a set. “I do not want to get into a televised fight and turn it into a circus.”
“The lawyer wanted grapes”
Carmen Balfagón cut off the call and De Vicente continued by pointing to Daniel Sancho’s defense: “There, in that room (of the trial), there was no one. There was a lawyer on duty who took him with astonishing calm. They told me he was meditating but had fallen asleep. The star day for any defense lawyer is the day the head of the investigation testifies and no one asked questions. The lawyer was looking for grapes. “The prosecutor hit him.”
Journalist Elisa Beni reminded her colleague that the Spanish lawyers, not being qualified in Thailand, were not even present at the reading of the judgment, but de Vicente clarified that “they say they prepared the strategy.”
From Vicente, who, as already mentioned, had the opportunity to speak with Daniel Sancho and to be present at the trial, he wanted to say that: “It is clear that here there is a victim who is Edwin Arrieta and a destroyed family but, for me, Daniel Sancho made me very sad because I saw him alone. He even told me thator I defend myself. I am my best defense. I was sad, as a lawyer, about the situation I found myself in. The father was there with all the documents of the case and this should not be done by a father but by a lawyer. “There was a feeling of helplessness on the part of the defense.”
The lawyer described how, in the middle of the trial, Daniel questioned his father about certain things and looked at the newspapers: “Nobody asked anything. Nobody refuted. I’m not someone to criticize the defense, I say what I saw. This sentence was expected because of the strength of the evidence. And the defense’s arguments were Kafkaesque. “What surprises me is that the defense says the sentence was not expected.”
