The judge investigating his mother-in-law’s death raised about ten suspicions. Luis Lorenzo Last June, two forensic experts differentiated the case by concluding that “there is no objective data” about the actor and his wife. Arancha PalominoHe is being investigated for murder, They will poison the old woman85 years old, with cadmium and manganese.
In her decision dated July 18, accessed by OPEN CASE, Judge Elena Sanz of the Arganda del Rey (Madrid) investigative court number 9, Dr. Maria Teresa Agüero and Dr. Javier Díaz expresses his doubts about Fernández’s report. and asks them to clarify, among other things: How Isabel Suárez died On June 28, 2001.
Carelessness or lack of care
“Forensic medicine must respond” as soon as possibleHe requests “many points for which there is no specific answer in the submitted report. The magistrate asks the experts to explain “the cause, type, etiology and date of death according to the type and amount of substances found in the (body) of the deceased”.
Additionally, “If, according to medical diagnoses, the deceased shows negligence or lack of medical care in the months before his death.” In addition, the judge is asking forensic experts to determine whether Luis Lorenzo’s aunt “was being held or hidden.” intellectual and volitional capacities “intact, diminished or cancelled” when he moved from his home in Grado (Asturias) to Madrid to live with the actor and his niece Arancha Palomino.
antipsychotic drugs
The judge also asked the experts whether giving the elderly woman more than one antipsychotic drug at the same time “could be considered normal” and “what effects this might have.” all these drug series in a person like the late Doña María Isabel”.
Finally, he encourages them to “report.” What are the studies? The people they cited in their report as to how the high levels of cadmium (found in Isabel Suárez’s body) might have come from normal distribution after death between tissues”.
The instructor asked forensic experts to name “researchers who have stated that the content of altered metals in a postmortem study (such as the study on the elderly woman) should not be used for this purpose.” single diagnostic indicator In a state of poisoning.”
The judge’s doubts came after Lorenzo and Palomino requested that the case against them be archived, based on the new exoneration report provided by forensic experts. As published by CASO ABIERTO, its results contradict the first autopsy performed on the old woman and the investigations of the Civil Guard, which accused the couple of taking the woman to Madrid. “economic plunder” When they were unsuccessful, they claimed that they “ill-treated and isolated him” until his death.
Postmortem diffusion
“The forensic physician who performed the autopsy concluded acute heavy metal poisoning only by taking into account the examination results. blood sample (of the victim), whose reference values have been determined living adultsExperts added in their report that these results “may be due to the fact that postmortem results differ depending on the place where the sample was taken, the time between death and sampling, and the fact of death.” postmortem diffusion and redistribution”.
“In case the old woman dies from acute poisoning,” experts told the judge.woman’s body would present injuries to the respiratory and digestive tract”, something that does not occur. Moreover chronic poisoning excluded (they would slowly poison it), because if so “residues of these two heavy metals should be present in the soil” hair, lungs, kidneys, liver, etc.”.
“Good medical follow-up”
Your report also contradicts this. Accusation of couple ill-treating elderly woman. The two doctors state that the woman “found physical injuries on her body consistent with a fall alone and consistent with her pathological history (repeated falls),” which coincides with the fact that she was diagnosed with “body dementia.” ”
Two forensic experts even state in their reports that “there is objective data reflecting that an incident occurred.” good medical follow-up “Good follow-up of these pathologies as well as good follow-up of pharmacological guidelines” coincides with the defense thesis of Lorenzo and Palomino.
Clear your doubts before applying
In this way, the new lawyer of the couple consulted, Juan Manuel MedinaHe evaluates the judge’s latest decision as follows: “Any action that delays the conclusion of the case is undesirable for my clients, because they are subject to a longer period of time. bench penalty It’s not fair, but on a procedural level we understand what the judge wants clear all possible doubts “Before the dismissal decision is made.”
The lawyer adds: “We I am convinced of your innocence As confirmed by the forensic medical report, my clients and we understand that once the questions raised by the magistrate are resolved, the procedure will sooner or later be archived.