M.G. and his son M.F.G., together with a woman called “Edita”, recruited the victims through a false job offer as waitresses in a café located at avenida 44 y calle 206, in Olmos, Province of Buenos Aires.
The victims, all Paraguayan, ignoring the true intention of the defendants, submitting them to commercial sexual exploitation in Argentina, accepted the offer. The victims were then transported from Paraguay and received at the address above mentioned, where they learnt immediately that there was no waitress job waiting for them. They were in a position of vulnerability, being in a foreign country, far away from family and friends and with no money to be able to return to Paraguay since they were demanded to pay for the costs of their transportation from Paraguay.
On 6 September 2008, the pre-trial judge issued a search warrant for the business located at avenida 44 y calle 206, Olmos, Buenos Aires. There were 18 women, all of whom were Paraguayan,and among whom were the victims of this case.M.G. and M.F.G. were also there and a 9mm pistol and a bag containing preservatives.
The victims belonged to a very low social class. They were clearly uneducated (L.O.V. did not even know how to count) and had difficulties to express themselves fluently in Spanish.
A translator had to be appointed due to the low level of education of the victims and their impossibility to express themselves in Spanish.
M.G. y su hijo M.F.G., coludidos con una mujer de nombre y/o apodo “Edita”, a través de un reparto organizado de funciones, captaron la voluntad de M.E.S.A., L.G.O.G., L.O.V. y M.C.C.G., a través de una proposición de trabajo mentida, consistente en labores de mesera en una cafetería ubicada en la avenida 44 y calle 206 de la localidad de Olmos, Provincia de Buenos Aires.
Aquéllas, ignorando que el verdadero designio de la proposición era someterlas a una explotación sexual aceptaron la oferta. En esas condiciones fueron trasladadasdesde Paraguay y recibidas en el comercio de referencia, ámbito en el que tomaron conocimiento de esa realidad y que no pudieron resistir en razón de la impotencia generada por la situación de inferioridad material que había impulsado su desarraigo y que les impedía contar con los medios indispensables para retornar a su lugar de origen, previo abonar los costes que había demandado su viaje, los cuales les eran exigidos.
El 6 de septiembre de 2008, se produjo el allanamiento del comercio ubicado en la avenida 44 y calle 206 de la localidad de Olmos, ordenado por el magistrado de la instrucción. Se constató la presencia de 18 mujeres de nacionalidad paraguaya en el lugar, entre las que se encontraban quienes aquí llegaron como víctimas de los hechos materia del juicio, los imputados M.G. y M.F.G., una pistola 9 mm con su numeración limada y una bolsa de nailon conteniendo preservativos.
Las victimas pertenecían a una clase social muy baja […] tenían una escasa ilustración y dificultades para expresarse fluidamente en castellano.
[…] hubo que recurrir a un traductor por la precariedad cultural de las víctimas y su imposibilidad de expresarse debidamente en castellano, situación patentizada por demás en el caso de L.O.V., quien ni siquiera sabía contar.
Аргентина
Парагвай“Como se vio al analizar la materialidad de la conducta […] tanto M.G. como M.F.G. participaron de una actividad concertada entre ambos y asumida libre y voluntariamente […] de captación, traslado y recibimiento […] mediante engaño y aprovechamiento de una situación de vulnerabilidad- por manera tal que no se advierte fisura en lo que a ello respecta ni en la acusación ni en la prueba”.
“[…] hay pruebas evidentes de que había un acuerdo previo entre Edita, M.G. y su hijo M.F.G. para captar y trasladar mujeres desde Paraguay y recibirlas en Argentina, por los medios reseñados y con un designio de explotación […]”
After examining the evidence presented it was established that both M.G. and M.F.G. engaged jointly in the recruitment, transportation, harbouring and receipt of the victims by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, deception and abuse of power or a position of vulnerability.
There is sufficient evidence that there existed a previous agreement between, an understanding, between the defendants to recruit and transport women from Paraguay to Argentina, where they were received and harboured against their will and with the purpose of exploiting them sexually.
There is sufficient evidence that on 6 September 2008, at approximately 2.40 a.m., M.F.G. knowingly possessed a firearm without a valid licence. The firearm was a pistol FM Bowning, calibre 9mm, and did not have a visible serial number.
After examining the evidence presented it was established that both M.G. and M.F.G. engaged jointly in the recruitment, transportation, harbouring and receipt of the victims by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, deception and abuse of power or a position of vulnerability.
There is sufficient evidence that there existed a previous agreement between, an understanding, between the defendants to recruit and transport women from Paraguay to Argentina, where they were received and harboured against their will and with the purpose of exploiting them sexually.
There is sufficient evidence that on 6 September 2008, at approximately 2.40 a.m., M.F.G. knowingly possessed a firearm without a valid licence. The firearm was a pistol FM Bowning, calibre 9mm, and did not have a visible serial number.
Article 145 bis and ter, with aggravating circumstances 2 and 3,of the Argentine Penal Code
Article 189 bis, 2º and 5º, of the Argentine Penal Code]
Article 85, 1º, of the Argentine Penal Code
Article 145 bis and ter, with aggravating circumstances 2 and 3, of the Argentine Penal Code
Article 189 bis, 2º and 5º, of the Argentine Penal Code
Criminal Court of La Plata (Corte Criminal de La Plata)
Judgement- Causa n. 2977/10
Database of UFASE (Unidad Fiscal de Asistencia en Secuestros Extorsivos y Trata de Personas), Ministerio Publico Fiscal, Republica Argentina.
Sentencia - Causa n.2977/10
Banco de dados (Unidad Fiscal de Asistencia en Secuestros Extorsivos y Trata de Personas), Ministerio Publico Fiscal, Republica Argentina
[…] una pariente de una de las victimas recibió mensajes de textos en su celular de su prima para que la sacara del lugar en el que se encontraba cautiva y que no le avisara a la policía de Olmos porque ésta era cómplice del dueño del lugar, M.G.
El juez a cargo de la instrucción, previo efectuar los allanamientos del lugar, encomendó a la prevención la realización de tareas de inteligencia tendentes a verificar los extremos volcados en la denuncia, labor que estuvo a cargo del agente Ojeda Mercado, perteneciente a la división trata de personas de la Policía Federal […]
El agente Ojeda realizó precisiones en cuanto a los peritajes sobre el arma secuestrada en el sentido que resultaba apta para el disparo y de funcionamiento normal y que las medidas realizadas tuvieron por fin examinar el objeto que, a simple vista, tenía la numeración limada. Rescató que del informe surgía que en el lateral derecho de la corredera tenía un número pero que debía ser tenido como provisorio pues no fue posible obtener la numeración real. No obstante ello, hizo mérito del informe proporcionado respecto de ése número por parte del Renar, en el cual se dejó en claro que la pistola estaba a nombre de la policía bonaerense y no registraba pedido de secuestro.
Desde su óptica existía connivencia con la policía encargada de prevenir y descubrir estos hechos, lo cual surgió claramente por el secuestro del arma que pertenecía a la policía en poder de los imputados y de los testimonios de las mujeres que relataron que M.G. era avisado con anticipación que se allanaría el local.
A woman received several text messages in her mobile phone from her cousin, one of the victims, asking to be rescued from the place where she was held, with express indication to be careful not to get in contact with the police department of Olmos because they were in connivance with M.G., the owner of the place where she was.
Before issuing the search warrant, the pre-trial judge ordered an investigation with the purpose of verifying the alleged facts presented in the complaint. The investigation was in charge of agent Ojeda Mercado, of the division of Trafficking in persons of the Argentine Federal Police.
The seized firearm was analysed and it was determined that it was fit for shooting and that it functioned normally. It was highlighted that the serial number on the right side of the gun had been erased, that there was a number on the gun but that it was not the real serial number. However, after checking the Argentine National Arms Registry [RENAR], it was established that the firearm was registered by the police of the Province of Buenos Aires and that there was no seizure or recovery request for it.
According to Ojeda, there was police connivance, which was clearly shown: a) by the seizure of a firearm that belonged to the police and which was in the possession of the defendants, and, b) by the victims’ testimony, who testified that M.G. was warned in advance of any police search.