Santiago Court Upholds Sentence Against Carabinero Captain for Illegitimate Force During 2019 Protests

The court emphasized that the sentence "expressly states that at the time of the events there was no illegitimate aggression, which is an indispensable requirement to establish any hypothesis of legitimate defense, even under the wording introduced by Law 21.560."

Santiago Court Upholds Sentence Against Carabinero Captain for Illegitimate Force During 2019 Protests

Original article: No aplica ley «Naín Retamal»: Corte de Santiago ratifica condena a capitán de Carabineros por apremios ilegítimos durante estallido de 2019


The Santiago Court of Appeals has dismissed the appeal filed by the defense against the conviction of former Carabinero captain, Pablo Andrés Carvajal Díaz, sentencing him to 7 years of effective imprisonment for the crime of qualified illegitimate force committed in October 2019 in the capital’s center.

In a unanimous decision (case number 1,975-2026), the Eighth Chamber of the appellate court rejected claims of violations in the contested judgment issued by the Fourth Oral Criminal Court of Santiago, specifically ruling against the application of the so-called ‘Ñain Retamal Law’ in favor of the appellant.

According to the court, «the sentence expressly states that at the time of the events there was no illegitimate aggression, which is an indispensable requirement to establish any hypothesis of legitimate defense, even under the wording introduced by Law 21.560.»

«The same proven facts in the case allow us to refute the defense’s claim that the defendant fired the riot shotgun in a sort of ‘reflex action’, particularly because the court established that he acted with direct intent. This is evident from the circumstances that it was established not only that he made one shot, but also, subsequent to inflicting the eye injury in question, he fired a second shot at close range and from behind with his shotgun,» the ruling states.

The chamber concluded that it is not possible to «plausibly maintain the existence of consecutive reflex actions, especially since they did not occur in the context of aggression against the accused.» For the full ruling, click here.

The Citizen

Obtén tu Pasaporte y apoya a El Ciudadano

Elimina la publicidad, accede a contenido exclusivo y sé parte de la comunidad.

Elige tu plan

Turista

$1.990 /mes

 


Sin anuncios · Publica tus artículos

Ciudadano — TOP

$4.990 /mes

 


Sin anuncios · Publicar artículos · PDFs · Newsletter exclusivo · Favoritos

Diplomático

$10.990 /mes

 


Sin anuncios · Publicar artículos · PDFs · Newsletter exclusivo · Favoritos · Voz editorial

Cancela en cualquier momento  ·  Sin permanencia


Reels

Ver Más »
Busca en El Ciudadano