“It is very possible that Alberto Nisman has committed suicide. He had a self-centered, vain, and narcissistic personality and his dismissal was coming due to the false accusation he made. I said that in the statement that they took me in the case. Lawyer Guillermo Alberdi, a former Federal Intelligence Agency (AFI) member, denied to Página/12 that no former agent had outlined the suicide hypothesis in the file. Alberdi’s name is public, because he was the lawyer of a supposed ex-agent, Allan Bogado, and later a Buenos Aires newspaper published that Alberdi himself was a member of the AFI.
For eight and a half years the justice of Comodoro Py, with the judge of Lago Escondido, Julián Ercolini, at the head, has kept the Nisman case open without having provided a single piece of evidence that someone has entered the prosecutor’s department. In the absence of evidence, from time to time, they carry out an operation in the media aligned with the opposition: in this case, at the beginning of May, they spread falsely, as evidenced by Alberdi’s statement to Página/12, that almost one hundred AFI agents They testified in the file and none outlined that Nisman committed suicide.
The reality is that the one hundred witnesses testified and nothing emerged from their statements to indicate a homicide. The ex-agents were not even asked what they thought, so they did not give a diagnosis: they only said that, for the most part, they did not even know Nisman.
The ex-spy speaks
In the absence of evidence, from Comodoro Py, they take the file for a walk from time to time. In this case, they argued that none of the ex-agents talked about Nisman committing suicide. They even mentioned Alberdi’s testimony.
Since Alberdi has been a public attorney since he left AFI, this newspaper contacted him to see if he had given an opinion or not on the circumstances of Nisman’s death. It was not easy to convince the lawyer to talk about his statement, but he was outraged: “We had to put up with the hypocritical spiel that we declared it a secret. They warned us twice, at the beginning and the end of each statement. And it turns out that last Sunday, a morning paper published it. That is why I agree to speak, essentially because what they published is false ”.
“They did not ask me for an opinion on Nisman’s death, but at one point I told them what I thought,” the lawyer said. I explained in detail why suicide seemed plausible to me. And I gave you three fundamentals. First, his self-centered, vain, and narcissistic personality, and the inevitable and immediate removal of him as a prosecutor, due to the irresponsible complaint. Second, the foregoing would expose his unquestionable reputation for enrichment and corruption. That was going to be made public. Third, the complaint had very serious errors, elementary errors, which would leave it in a very bad light publicly.”
Perhaps this last reference has to do with Alberdi’s client, the former spy Allan Bogado. It happens that Nisman said in the complaint that Bogado participated in the negotiations with the Iranian side in Zurich and New York and it turned out that Bogado had never left the country. In other words, Nisman’s complaint was made in such a hurry that he did not even request a report from Migration.
Another fishing excursion
To move the file around a bit, in 2022, seven years after Nisman’s death, they summoned those who worked at SIDE, then AFI at that time, to testify. The alliance with the media was exposed, once again, in a long report published by a morning newspaper last Sunday.
The tandem of Judge Ercolini and prosecutor Taiano went out, as they say in judicial jargon, on a fishing excursion: they summoned a hundred spies to see if anyone knew anything. Of particular interest were two cases that, in reality, did not provide any clues about the death of the prosecutor either:
- An agent used his cell phone very close to the home of computer scientist Diego Lagomarsino, the man who lent the prosecutor the gun with which he shot himself. It is already clear that the agent lived in the same complex as Lagomarsino since long before the story of Nisman and his complaint existed. Even though the agent declared, he showed the papers, they continue to use the subject to make smoke.
- Another agent in Puerto Madero, near where Nisman lived, also spoke by cell phone. The man testified at the time, he maintained that he went to have a coffee with a friend and even paid with a card, which was verified.
The hypothesis is leaking from minute one: if they had been part of a sophisticated plot to kill the prosecutor, they would not have used his official cell phone. It’s elementary.
spy war chapter thousand
The lack of evidence makes the entire file revolve around hypotheses, rumors, comments, and, especially, the versions originating from the former members of what was the SIDE and since 2015 has been called AFI. The cause is in Comodoro Py as a result of the declaration of the once-powerful Horacio Antonio Jaime Stiuso. Before Judge Fabiana Palmaghini, the former head of Operations said that “Nisman was assassinated” and that “it was the work of the Iranians.” When asked how it was done, he said he didn’t know, but “when the Iranians set out to do something like that, they do it.” He could not contribute a single element, despite being the man closest to Nisman. With that statement, Palmaghini sent the case to federal jurisdiction, although she later said that she was sorry, that she hurried.
Stiuso was in conflict with the government of Cristina Kirchner, who ousted him from office, and it was also always said that he was accusing Kirchnerism of the death of one of his men, Pedro El Lauchón Viale. In the week that ended, the Federal Oral Court number 5 of San Martín acquitted the two police officers who killed El Lauchón in the framework of an anti-drug proceeding that included the search of the former agent’s home. It happened in 2013. The judges unanimously considered it proven that Viale received bullets from the police and that they defended themselves.
There was another former agent, who ended up working for Patricia Bullrich in the Ministry of Security, during the machismo, who declared that the AFI sent him to the corner of Viviana Fein’s prosecutor’s office, which was investigating the death of Nisman, to spy on The fiscal. In truth, what was checked was whether he was going to declare Stiuso, who was wanted by the AFI for various internal complaints. The issue was not related to the death in the Le Parc building in Puerto Madero, but it is part of that war between spies that they use as an excuse to keep the file on Nisman’s death open.
Eight and a half years is nothing
The machismo has been using the Nisman case since that January 18 when they found the body of the prosecutor. In the eight and a half years that have elapsed, Judge Ercolini and prosecutor Eduardo Taiano could only rely on untenable expertise from the Gendarmerie, ordered to be done at a time when Patricia Bullrich was Minister of Security:
- On the one hand, it contradicts what all the doctors who acted in the case ruled, especially those of the Forensic Medical Corps (CMF) who, within the framework of a large medical board, maintained that “none of the elements indicates with certainty a medical expert – legal that it was a homicidal act “. The CMF does thousands of autopsies per year and the Gendarmerie none.
- Even more forceful was the final report of the Criminalistics Board headed by the Federal Police: “At the time of the shot there was no third person in the bathroom.” The conclusion arose from the analysis of the blood stains that were all over the bathroom, something impossible if there had been someone in the same environment. Even more, if the hypothesis of the Gendarmerie was taken into account, that there were three supposed members of command inside the tiny bathroom.
The judge and the prosecutor never called the experts from the Gendarmerie to testify under oath and in the time that had elapsed, Commander Orlando Caballero, who was the head of that expertise, the result of which the newspaper Clarín announced before the work had begun, died. Nor did the judge and the prosecutor summon all the experts to discuss their conclusions, including crazy data from the Gendarmerie such as that Nisman was given a drug, ketamine, without any of it appearing in the toxicological studies and without it being registered. Not even a puncture to the body.
Beyond the rude manipulation of the file, in the eight and a half years it was not possible to outline even a hypothesis of how someone entered the building, the apartment, and the bathroom, without leaving the slightest trace. The main door of unit 2 on the 13th floor was locked with a lock on the inside, with no lock on the outside. And on the service door, there were two locks. The top one was also locked from the inside and was opened by Nisman’s mother, and the bottom one wasn’t locked, but it had the key hanging on the inside. That’s why a locksmith had to be summoned.
None of this could be disputed in the legal case. There is not a suspect or a detainee or any trace of an alleged Iranian-Venezuelan commando with which some leaders allied to machismo were delirious. That’s why they take spy warfare and other tricks out for a ride.