Law

he Lawyer Carloota, Jeddah ShamoHe talked about his customer’s mental health and said that the conflict council is, meaning that this was tantamount to expropriation in that municipality Mexico State (Edomex).

in Photo news, with nacho lozano, The statements made by a lawyer 73 -yearsAnd that is now investigated to kill two people in Cali de Chalko.

Today it has been confirmed that the case of Mrs. Carlota was a stripping of her home, “she reads in the post with a extract of Nacho Luzano’s news.

lawyer

Hugo Osurio, Donna Carloota’s lawyerHe did not want to give more details about the case because he said he could not talk much about it, so that the investigation was not hindered.

However, in the few words he presented in an interview, he talked about sMental cupping for Jeddah Shamo And he said Quiet lady This is good.

“It is good, quiet so far, it is the only thing I can tell you, I don’t allow me to provide more information,” he said.

At the same time, he turned the house in the conflict and its legal status, he said:

Yes, yes, if her house is for the lady, without any problem. ”

So far, it is known that the old woman He suffers from diabetes It requires management Insulin Every four hours.

It must be remembered that in his first statements, Mrs. Carlota argued that because of his age, You already have mental problems This led her to act the way she did.

For its part, the Office of the Prosecutor Edomex announced this Mrs. 73 years old And not 74 as it was distributed on social networks.

Housing

In the statement about transferring Carota, Eduardo and Mariana, The Mexican Prosecutor Office announced the complaint filed on March 27 The crime of getting rid of your home.

In the complaint, Mariana, the daughter of Mrs. Carlota, revealed that three people entered her home in Colonia Hasinda de Guadalobi, In Chalco Del Edomex.

However, on March 28, the police moved to the house and did not find anyone in the place.

Now, the detainee is already, the prosecution is determined to grant Obtaining property for the benefit of the complainantBut his lawyer refused to receive property on the pretext that “at the present time he was not in his interest.”

*MVG*