Impartiality under suspicion: Agüero's defense will request the annulment of the trial

The case regarding the crimes at the Neonatal Hospital of Córdobacould be annulled due to a serious irregularity during the trial. Brenda Agüero's defense, who was convicted of five homicides and eight attempted homicides, reported hidden ties between a juror and the hospital. According to her attorney, this casts doubt on the impartiality of the verdict in one of the province's most significant trials.

Attorney Juan Manuel Riveros indicated that the juror in question admitted to having been a patient at the Neonatal Hospital during the events under investigation. She also acknowledged that she used the trial as an academic training opportunity, since she is a nursing student. That direct relationship with the scene of the events and her personal interest in the process would compromise her objectivity.

Additionally, Riveros stated that the juror may have been a student of one of the defendants, which was also not disclosed during selection. "When the selection was made, everyone was asked if they knew any of the eleven defendants; this person never mentioned the ties," he said. The omission of that information could constitute grounds for nullifying the conviction.

Questions about the judicial process in one of Córdoba's most sensitive cases

The defense attorney left open the possibility of filing an appeal seeking to annul the sentence due to a violation of due process guarantees. "If impartiality was affected, I believe the validity of the sentence could be at risk," the attorney warned. The role of the popular jury requires objectivity, neutrality, and absolute transparency during its formation.

The revelation of these ties raises concerns about the oversight exercised during the jury selection hearing. The responsibility to guarantee an impartial court is non-delegable and must be strictly observed by the technical court. A tainted jury compromises the entire process and exposes the judicial system to new challenges.

This case, which shocked public opinion due to its seriousness, now faces the risk of being judicially tainted by avoidable errors. The possible annulment of the trial would not change the facts, but it could require the process to be repeated from scratch. A failure in jury selection can undermine the legitimacy of the entire provincial justice system.