The Federal Court of Criminal Cassation confirmed this Thursday the resolution that had rejected the request for house arrest made by the defense of Nicolás Gabriel Carrizo, prosecuted as a secondary participant in the attempted aggravated homicide of Vice President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. The second chamber of the highest criminal court rejected the proposal presented by Carrizo's defense and thus confirmed the decision that the Federal Oral Court (TOF) 6 had taken when it understood that "there are still with respect to Carrizo specific dangers of escape and obstruction of the investigation ". The decision of the Cassation was reached unanimously by judges Guillermo Yacobucci, Alejandro Slokar and Ángela Ledesma and was reflected in an eleven-page resolution to which Télam had access. Carrizo's defense had demanded that he be allowed to access the benefit of house arrest after ensuring that he had proven his roots and that from the beginning of the investigation he had collaborated. "With regard to the danger of flight, we must highlight the serious facts for which Carrizo is required to stand trial, the complexity of the case, the pending sanction with which the crime is imposed and the impossibility, in its case, of conditional sentencing," said Judge Yacobucci when rejecting the proposal. "From another angle, regarding the indicators of obstruction in the investigation, it is worth highlighting the recent arrival of the proceedings to the trial court, which entails the need to protect the evidence already received and, in turn, that which remains to be provided and /or produce," he continued. Yacobucci also understood that "the functional consideration of the restriction of the defendant's freedom within the walls appears to be suitable and, for the moment, necessary from the perspective of reasonableness to be able to ensure the completion of the oral and public debate." Judge Ledesma, for her part, added "that the procedural risk indicators weighed by the court, especially those linked to doubts about his roots and his conduct in relation to the concealment of elements of evidence - an extreme that emerges from a conversation obtained of your cell phone - constitute objective elements of importance for evaluating the procedural risks and, at the moment, they are not susceptible to neutralization with a moderate measure such as the one requested by the challenger".