09.02.16: The second hearing in the trial against Francisco and Mónica took place today Wednesday March 9. The comrades are accused of belonging to a terrorist organization, slaughter, injury and conspiracy, charges for which the prosecutor is asking for 44 years prison for each.
While this hearing was taking place in court No. 4 of the Tribunale Nazionale, a group in solidarity gathered outside the walls, shouting slogans of support that could be heard by the comrades inside the court.
Despite the fact that yesterday’s hearing was centred on the statements of Mónica, Francisco and witnesses (police and eyewitnesses) presented by the Public Prosecutor, today’s began with that of the witnesses called by the defence before moving on to experts’ statements.
The four witnesses presented by the defence confirmed the statements that they gave to the police at the time, in which none of the features that they described correspond with those of Mónica and Francisco.
The expert witnesses (all policemen) summoned by the Public Prosecutor focused on various aspects:
– Hazard of the explosive artefact: the policemen (national, scientific and TEDAX) who deposed followed the same line of magnifying the supposed explosion hazard and the possibility of causing harm to human life. There was an attempt to scientifically endorse this argument from a theoretical study on the impact of an artefact of 3 kg of gunpowder in an open field. This argument was contested by the defence since, although the investigation mentions a charge of between 2 and 3 Kg and the claim statement describes the use of 2 kg of gunpowder, the reports were made according to the theoretical criterion of 3 Kg, highlighting the intentions of the police.
– Anthropometric analysis: this compares images of Francisco and Mónica taken from the internet (without knowing whether the police have manipulated them or not) with images from Barcelona surveillance cameras. It is concludes with a high probability of coincidence in the case of Francisco and a lesser one in Mónica’s case. It should be pointed out that none of the witnesses has any qualification related to anthropometric expertise. The intervention of the defence highlighted the handicap of the computer system used, which can only give probabilities but cannot establish identity beyond any doubt.
– Belonging to a terrorist organization: the police’s argument is based on considering that the FAI-FRI, GAC and Commando Insurreccional Mateo Morral are part of the same terrorist organization. The policemen who elaborated the report on the FAI-FRI as a terrorist organization reported that it is considered such in a European Disposition of 2001, but did not know that already from 2009, in the same Disposition, it is no longer considered a terrorist organization. They also cite in their reports various trials that have taken place in European countries against the FAI-FRI. When asked what sources they had consulted to become aware of these trials, they revealed that they had used open sources (internet, press) and in no case any official body (court, police forces, etc.).
To establish the link between the FAI-FRI and the GAC they make reference to the fact that the latter respond to the call for direct action, solidarity and mutual support that the FAI-FRI realizes. Another argument that the police use to maintain that the GAC are a terrorist organization is temporality: they report that after the GAC’s first text of presentation appeared the first coordinated action was realized in the Spanish State.
In the description that they give of the functioning of the GAC the existence of some kind of informal leadership is indicated. They also cite as an indication of Mónica and Francisco’s belonging to a terrorist organization the various international communiques showing solidarity with them, such as those made starting by the call for a “Black December”; they also mention the solidarity text that Mónica contributed to the book “Mapeando el fuego” while on trial in Chile for the caso bombas.
Finally, in the afternoon session the medical expert cited the specific allegations of the injured woman that mainly certified psychological consequences resulting from the experience of the Pilar. The day ended with police reports related to fingerprints and DNA, which established that neither one nor the other were found in the places inspected in Zaragoza (in the remains of the explosive and in the phone booth from which the bomb warning call was made).
In the face of this farcical trial, the comrades are not alone. Until we are all free! Solidarity and struggle!
(via Act For Freedom Now!)