After a prolonged silence we have some news to report.  The UCCR was asked by the defense team to remain silent while the appeals were being prepared.  Now that they have been filed, we are able to provide you with much of that information.

In May, the defense began their work preparing a comprehensive appeal.  During the trial, through courtroom objections or in their summary arguments, the defense signaled to the judges various grounds for appeal on specific points of law.  Even though the defense believed that they had a strong case, they remained prudent and exercised foresight during the trial phase.

On July 27, Osvaldo Villalobos submitted his appeal to the Sala 3, the designated court of appeal for this case.  This court is comprised of 5 higher judges who will rule on the points of law included in the appeal.  The extensive brief prepared by the defense is a joint effort by several attorneys selected by Osvaldo Villalobos for this task, and includes input from our lawyer Jose Miguel Villalobos.

The 300 page document does not attempt to correct the bias within the decision by the original tribunal, but instead focuses on the errors in law that occurred in the early stages of the case during the investigation. The goal of the appeal argument is to establish that sufficient rules of evidence collection and legal process were violated to structurally undermine the case.

If the judges of the appeal court agree that the rights of Osvaldo Villalobos were violated, then none of the evidence that was gathered illegally would stand and the case would collapse along with the conviction.  In the oral briefing that we received from the legal team, they declared that this is their conviction and belief.

However, what can we expect?  As it was explained to us, there are 4 possible rulings that may come from the judges of the Sala 3:

1) First, of course, the Court could reject the defense argument, uphold the conviction and sentence by the lower court, and Osvaldo would remain in jail for the rest of his life.

2) The second possibility is that they could uphold the conviction but reduce the sentence issued by the trial court due to Osvaldo’s age.  In cases of advanced age, courts in Costa Rica are obligated to at least consider some alternatives (although it seems Osvaldo's trial court minimized their effort in this regard).

3) The third possibility is that the court could Reverse the Verdict because Osvaldo was not given his rights in law as described in the preceding paragraphs. In this case verdict would be overturned and Osvaldo would be free.

4) The fourth and final possibility is that the judges of the Sala 3 could declare the trial itself sufficiently flawed and order that a new trial must be held.  It is our understanding that this option is always reserved by the court if they find that legal rights and processes have been so obviously frustrated by human participants that justice could not possibly be assured.  Osvaldo’s lawyers do not dismiss this possibility, but consider it unlikely as there was appropriate order to the trial proceedings themselves.