The Supreme Court of Justice has summoned two additional judges to resolve one of the most controversial cases of gender-based violence in Mendoza: the 2016 murder of Julieta González, whose classification as femicide divides the country's highest court.
The tribunal, currently composed of judges Horacio Rosatti, Carlos Rosenkrantz, and Ricardo Lorenzetti, decided to incorporate, by lottery, federal judges Rocío Alcalá, from Resistencia, and Gustavo Castiñeira, from Mendoza, as confirmed by the Argentine News Agency. Alcalá and Castiñeira are presidents of federal chambers.
The decision is expected to be divided among the ministers of the highest court.
The Crime That Shocked Mendoza
Julieta González was 21 years old when she disappeared on Spring Day in 2016. The prosecution's hypothesis maintains that the victim had informed him that she was expecting his child, which triggered the fatal attack.
The Debate on the Classification of the Crime
In September 2019, the oral court made up of Mauricio Juan, María Alejandra Ratto, and Jorge Coussirat sentenced Di Césare to 18 years in prison for simple homicide. The judges did not grant the gender violence aggravating factor requested by the Prosecutor's Office, considering that there were not enough indications to establish a couple relationship.
The sentence generated massive protests from the #NiUnaMenos movement and other feminist organizations, which demanded a conviction for femicide.
In early 2021, the Second Chamber of the Mendoza Court of Appeals reviewed the ruling and considered that the homicide occurred in a context of gender-based violence, changing the classification to femicide and increasing the sentence to life imprisonment.
The Foundations of the Provincial Court
The Mendoza Court justified its decision, confirmed in April 2022, stating that "the multiplicity of injuries and the way the victim's body was attacked are indicators of a disciplinary will, of a taking of control by the aggressor in the face of the victim's resistance to being subjected".
The provincial court added: "It is undeniable that there was a discussion and that Di Césare used all the means at his disposal – greater physical build to strangle to death and even hit with stones from the place – to impose himself on Julieta González's frail defense".
The magistrates concluded that "these circumstances show a clear asymmetry of power, characteristic of gender violence", thus modifying the legal classification of the fact.
Arrival at the Supreme Court
Di Césare's defense appealed to the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation through the so-called horizontal cassation recourse, arguing against the modification of the crime's classification.
The case is in full debate among the ministers of the highest court. The detail: Castiñeira is from the province where the crime occurred.
The ruling marks a key moment in the legal definition of the femicide figure in Argentina, as the ruling could set a precedent on the criteria for identifying gender-based violence in homicides.
Although the position of each magistrate cannot be known until the ruling is signed, the call for additional judges indicates that the decision will be divided among Rosatti, Rosenkrantz, and Lorenzetti.
The additional judges Rocío Alcalá and Gustavo Castiñeira, selected by lottery from the list of presidents of Federal Chambers, have already been notified and are expected to participate in the final resolution of the case.
Implications of the Ruling for the Femicide Figure
The ruling issued by the Supreme Court will have national scope and may establish legal criteria on what elements must be considered to classify a homicide as femicide, the Argentine News Agency learned.
The central debate revolves around whether it is necessary to prove a formal couple relationship to apply the gender violence aggravating factor, or if it is enough to demonstrate a power imbalance and a context of male domination at the time of the crime.
The case also raises questions about the interpretation of Law 26.791, which incorporated femicide into the Penal Code in 2012, and about the necessary evidentiary standards for its application in cases where there is no prior stable relationship.
The Supreme Court's ruling will be closely watched by human rights and feminist organizations as well as the legal community, as it will set a precedent for one of the most debated criminal offenses in recent years in Argentina.
The Evidence and the Accused's Partial Confession
Di Césare testified only in January 2018 and admitted having argued with Julieta that day. He recognized that she scratched him and that he responded by hitting her in the face, that he took her in his vehicle but affirmed that the young woman got down and he did not see her again.
Scientific evidence directly incriminated him: skin remains of Di Césare under Julieta's nails, the victim's blood in the accused's vehicle, and coincidence of their cell phone antennas in the same place at the same time of the disappearance.
The analysis of the cellular phone revealed previous searches before the crime on how to perform a DNA test on a fetus from a corpse and how to get rid of a body.
Her body was found the next day in the mountainous area of Cacheuta, in the department of Luján de Cuyo, tied by feet and hands, a few meters from the maximum security prison of Almafuerte.
The investigation quickly pointed to Andrés Di Césare, then 26 years old and son of a renowned provincial transport businessman, who had been presented days before as the victim's boyfriend.
According to subsequent statements from Julieta's mother, they had known each other since childhood in the neighborhood.
