|
UCCR Letter to
the Editor of AM Costa Rica;
Concerning the liability of claimants
To Claim
or not to Claim:
This
letter is being sent by the UCCR in response
to the lead article published in your
Tuesday, December 19th, edition. We feel
that the article contains inaccurate or
misleading information and appears to have
the intention of discouraging filers of
claims against the Villalobos brothers from
withdrawing their claims in advance of the
trial next February. The article implies
that those who withdraw claims run the risk
of some financial penalty imposed by the
court for the benefit of Oswaldo and that in
some cases such judgments may have already
been made without the knowledge of the
former claimant.
Our legal
research reveals that Articles 118 and 78 of
the Criminal Procedural Code establish that
in the event of withdrawal, the party which
initiated the civil action will be
responsible to pay his attorney fees as
agreed upon between them, or as determined
by the court, based upon the work
performed. It is acknowledged that the
filer has the right to continue or to
withdraw as he chooses. No reference is
made to judicial empowerment to castigate
the filer who has decided to withdraw. It
should be obvious that in the event such a
ruling has occurred in this case, the
claimant's attorney would have surely been
notified.
It is
clear to us that there are no negative
consequences to withdrawal unless viewed,
perhaps, from the perspective of some
lawyers presently representing claimants.
There is, however, much to the benefit of
all investors, if you believe as we do, that
Enrique Villalobos is our only hope to ever
see our money again, and that you trust his
stated intentions. The numerous filers who
managed unwittingly to convert this case
into a "complex" one have only succeeded in
prolonging the agony of all investors. Many
who were enticed by the government to file
in the hope of sharing the few millions the
government could get its hands on did not
fully realize at the time what they were
signing. They now represent the core of the
prosecution case against the Villalobos'.
Lacking hard evidence with which to prove
the validity of their charges, the
government lawyers are preparing to use
instead the existence of the claims to
demonstrate guilt in much the same way as
lamb producers !
promote their product with bumper stickers
that claim you should: "Eat Lamb! 10,000
coyotes cannot be wrong!" ( as if the more
coyotes there are, the more convincing the
proposition.)
Finally,
the filers who cling to their claims
mistakenly believe they have nothing to lose
by doing so. They should understand that,
if he is exonerated, Oswaldo does not
relinquish his right to counter sue in civil
court. To his credit he has announced that
he would not seek damages from those who
have challenged his integrity and caused him
great financial loss. Even so, a change in
circumstances could provoke a change of
heart with resultant years of litigation
before a final settlement is reached with
individual investors. The decision as to
whether or not one ought to withdraw should
be a simple one- depending upon whether the
investor thinks there is a greater
possibility to recover his money from the
Costa Rican government or from Enrique
Villalobos.
For the
UCCR it has been a no-brainer since the
beginning. We have supported the person
that many of us knew personally to be a man
of his word, one with whom we had entrusted
our money and one who would still be
managing it for us except for the unjust
intrusion of the government. When the book
is written on this saga it will reveal the
irony that the very governmental
institutions that were supposed to be
looking after investor interests handled
matters in such a way that procedures were
ignored, rights were abused, and Enrique was
obliged to take the actions he did to
preserve the privacy of his investors and to
protect his assets (our money) from
confiscation.
UCCR
Saturday, 23. December 2006

|