Physical Address

304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124

Caro Quintero Disputes Identity Allegations, Requests Proof in Response to Reforma | Mexico News | Latest Updates from Mexico

WASHINGTON, DC- Rafael Caro Quintero, a drug trafficker linked to the Guadalajara Cartel, denied being him, according to an article in Reforma, as one of the arguments he presented to a federal court to avoid extradition and be tried in the United States for the murder of Kiki Camarena, a former agent at the DEA, and three other accusations.

However, Caro Quintero maintains that “He is not the drug lord the Justice Department is looking for”. According to judicial documents to which Reforma had access, the Sinaloan drug trafficker requested that 10 expert opinions be carried out as proof of identity to demonstrate that they are looking for him.

Between the identity proofs that Rafael requests Caro Quintero There is the physiognomic identity system, forensic photography and copy documents, which serve to “prove that his capture was a mistake” and that, in any case, “the real drug dealer is still out of prison”.

It may interest you: Kiki Camarena: Who was the former DEA agent whose murder has been linked to the CIA, “El Chapo” and Caro Quintero

In the formal extradition request, the United States offered a video showing the drug trafficker, who also requested that expert reports are applied computer science in audio, video, photography, and stenographic transcription analysis as well as acoustics, forensic phonetics, and voice analysis.

Caro Quintero does not deny his name, but he does deny that he is the one they are looking for. The informative note clarifies that although, as is, Caro Quintero has not denied his name in the process, he has a legal strategy position, with which he wants to convince that scientifically their features do not match with those of the 7 photographs and a video contained in the extradition file.

In this type of procedures, the photos and images in general presented by the requesting country are the only ones that can be taken into account to establish the identity of the extraditable.

Under that same process, the US requested the extraditions of Ovidio Guzmán López “The Mouse”, son of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán in the oral extradition hearing at the Altiplano Penitentiary, as well as other drug traffickers such as Eduardo Arellano Felix “The Doctor”, and his lieutenant Gustavo Rivera Martínez, “The Gus”; and Marco Antonio Paredes Machado, operator of “El Chapo” in Sonora, among others.

First He did not have the opportunity to litigate his argument. because they delivered it practically from the moment the Foreign Ministry ordered it; the second failed to prevent its delivery with that legal tactic that Rafael Caro Quintero is now trying.

Extradition trials can only be litigated with two arguments or exceptions: prove that the detainee is not the person sought by the requesting country and prove that the formal request does not comply with the Extradition Treaty between the two countries.

Caro Quintero has opposed the two exceptions to avoid his transfer to a prison in the neighboring country.

I send Caro Quintero a strategy to prolong delivery. Authorities versed in this extradition process perceive that Caro Quintero has implemented a legal strategy with the purpose of significantly prolonging his surrender to the United States, an action that they believe he has at his disposal. This perception is based on the absence so far of a legal ruling by Judge Marcela Guadalupe Castro Núñez, in charge of the delivery process. Furthermore, it is expected that even after this determination, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will have to make a ruling, probably followed by the presentation of an amparo by the boss, which will require resolution in two additional instances. This entire procedural course is estimated to take more than a year to complete.

In Mexico, Caro Quintero still has to serve 10 and a half of the 40 years in prison to whom he was sentenced for the Camarena crime.

In his argument before the judicial authority, the trafficker also alleges that the formal extradition request does not comply with the Treaty because it is poorly translated and is not clear on several points, which he considers a violation of due process. In support of this allegation, some of the documents presented as expert reports are translations of the original documents, with which he attempts to demonstrate that the Spanish version presented before the judge in the case is at least deficient and inaccurate.

Furthermore, he argues that the extradition request violates the legal principle of non bis in idem, which establishes that No one can be tried twice for the same crime. The reasoning is that since he was already tried in Mexico and sentenced to 40 years in prison for Camarena’s murder in 1985, he cannot be tried again for the same crime in the United States.

The US wants to extradite Caro Quintero and try him in his country. Since 1987, the Federal Court of the Central District of California, in Los Angeles, has ordered the capture of Caro Quintero for eight criminal charges, three of which are related to the kidnapping and murder of Enrique Camarena.

Based on this accusation, on August 11, 2013, a federal judge issued a provisional arrest warrant for extradition purposes, which ultimately led to the arrest of the boss on July 15 in Choix, Sinaloa.

It is important to note that when The United States presented the formal extradition request not only requested his surrender for the Camarena case, but also for three other accusations that the United States had not previously been processed for his provisional detention.

Americans too They formally requested his extradition to try him in the Federal Court of the Eastern District of New York on four criminal counts, in the Federal Court for the Southern District of Texas on three counts, and in the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, on four other counts.

In total, it is intended try him in four different courts for a total of 19 crimes.

Extradition requests from those close to Caro Quintero have been denied. On August 23 of last year, the Federal Judiciary Council relieved Rubén Darío Noguera Gregoire as head of the Sixth District Court in Federal Criminal Proceedings of Mexico City, the judicial body in charge of the extradition trial of Rafael Caro Quintero.

Now the judge is responsible for handling the case. Marcela Guadalupe Castro Nunez while Noguera Gregoire was appointed Eighth District Judge in Criminal Amparo of this city.

Noguera Gregoire is the one who on May 12, 2015, when he was the Fourteenth District Judge in the same matter, issued a legal opinion in which he rejected the United States extradition request for Ernesto Fonseca Carrillo, “Don Neto” another of Caro Quintero’s main partners and also wanted in the Camarena case.

On that occasion, the judge considered that the extradition request against “Don Neto” did not comply with the Extradition Treaty, since he had already been tried in Mexico for the same facts and sentenced to 40 years in prison for the former agent’s crime from the DEA.

In matters of extradition, the legal opinions of the judges are not binding, that is, they do not oblige the federal Executive to rule in the same way. However, in this case, after Noguera notified his resolution, the Foreign Ministry denied the extradition of “Don Neto” in the same terms as the judge.

On May 27 of the same year, the then Secretary of Foreign Affairs, José Antonio Meade, denied the extradition of Fonseca and put an end to the United States’ attempts to try him for the murder of the former DEA agent. His argument was the same: he could not be tried twice for the same crime.

With Caro Quintero, the situation could be different, since if the extradition in the Camarena case fails, the Americans have other accusations pending in different district courts, such as that of New York.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *