translated from Spanish: The curiosities of the case of Aldo Motta

within weeks of the final decision of the Supreme Court in relation to the future of Aldo Motta, former manager of the societies waterfall Julio Ponce, who resorted for annulment to the Court then would become known know your sentence (probation for four years) in the cascade case. While this happens, a couple of curiosities were giving boat between the protagonists of the case.
Including the extent complainant drew attention the nexus between Motta and one of members of the second Chamber of the Court, Jean Pierre Matus, who on occasion made a report in law as part of the series of documents from the former manager to strengthen his defense. These days, he is a consultant of the army for the development of a model of fraud prevention.
It is a report on the criminal types, called “Inexistendcia of the securities market law crimes attributable to Aldo Motta”, which, in any case, was rejected as a means of proof by the room considering it pointless.
Matus is a member of the second Chamber of the Supreme Court, which examines the request for cancellation of conviction by Motta. However, Matus does not participate in the view of the appeal, since it was in the hands of five titular judges room.
He was also a comment the alternative taken by the judges that the cause was “in Studio” and not “agreement”. The difference would be that the judges want to think first a little background of the allegation to then get ready for the drafting of the decision. That would extended, incidentally, the deadlines so that the decision is known.
 

Original source in Spanish