The owners of Vidal Plast were acquitted for the San Cristóbal explosion because the Public Prosecutor’s Office did not present sufficient evidence to prove their criminal liability for the tragedy that occurred on August 14, 2023, which left 38 people dead and 59 injured.
The Second Criminal Chamber of the Judicial District of San Cristóbal determined that the evidence presented during the trial failed to overcome the presumption of innocence of the accused or to demonstrate that they acted negligently under the circumstances that caused the explosion.
You might be interested in: Vidal Plast Case: trial on the merits begins against owners for San Cristóbal explosion
The acquitted are Edward Armando Vidal Garrido, Maribel Sandoval Almánzar de Vidal, Mercedes Altagracia Vidal Sandoval and the company Vidal Plast.
Why were the owners of Vidal Plast acquitted?
The main reason for the acquittal was the insufficient evidence presented by the Public Prosecutor’s Office. The court considered that the elements gathered during the investigation and presented at trial were not sufficient to establish, with the degree of certainty required in criminal matters, that the owners engaged in negligent conduct that caused the tragedy.
More Read
To obtain a conviction for involuntary manslaughter, the prosecution had to prove not only that the explosion occurred at the Vidal Plast facilities, but also that there was an action or omission attributable to the defendants and that such conduct had a direct relationship with the deaths and injuries caused by the incident.
According to the court’s decision, that link was not sufficiently proven during the trial.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office failed to destroy the presumption of innocence
One of the foundations of the decision was the presumption of innocence, a principle that establishes that a person must be considered innocent as long as their criminal responsibility is not proven through sufficient evidence.
More Read
In this case, the judges concluded that the evidence presented by the prosecuting body did not reach the level necessary to issue a conviction against the owners of Vidal Plast.
For this reason, the court rejected the accusation and acquitted the four defendants, including the commercial entity.
The decision also orders the cessation of the coercive measures that were imposed on the defendants.
What was the Public Prosecutor’s Office investigating?
The Public Ministry had accused the owners of Vidal Plast of engaging in negligent actions related to the company’s operations and the handling of materials used in its industrial processes.
During the investigation, the conditions under which the company operated and the materials found at the site at the time of the explosion were analyzed.
The prosecution sought to establish that certain actions or omissions by the owners had contributed to the fatal outcome. However, the court found that the evidence presented was not sufficient to prove that criminal liability.
More Read
Explosion in San Cristobal: what happened?
The explosion in San Cristóbal occurred around 3:10 in the afternoon on August 14, 2023, on Padre Ayala Street, near the corner of J. Peynado.
The incident caused a strong shockwave that affected homes, vehicles, and commercial establishments located in the surrounding area.
The tragedy left 38 people dead and 59 injured, in addition to significant material damage. More than 12 homes and around 70 businesses were affected by the explosion.
The incident caused deep shock in San Cristóbal and triggered an investigation to determine the causes of the accident and establish possible responsibilities.
What will happen now with the Vidal Plast case?
Although the court has already issued an acquittal, the full decision will allow for a more precise understanding of which evidence the judges considered insufficient and the legal reasons used to dismiss the charges.
The full reading of the sentence is set for September 7th, the date on which the complete grounds for the decision will be made known.
Acquittal means that, for this criminal proceeding, the Public Prosecutor’s Office failed to prove the liability of the owners of Vidal Plast beyond the standard required for a conviction.
The case is thus marked by one of the most serious tragedies to occur in San Cristóbal in recent years and by a judicial decision whose main basis was the lack of sufficient evidence to prove that the owners acted negligently and were criminally responsible for the explosion.
