Mar del Plata police officer remanded in custody for alerting robbery gang
The Court of Appeal upheld the detention of Nahuel Paz, accused of monitoring police frequencies to facilitate robberies. WhatsApp messages and a stolen watch were key evidence.
"Ear, you're on": WhatsApp messages and a stolen watch bring down police officer accused of aiding robbers
The Court of Appeal and Guarantees in Criminal Matters confirmed the pre-trial detention of Nahuel Agustín Paz, a police officer accused of listening to the force's radio frequencies and alerting a criminal gang to the movements of patrol units. According to lacapitalmdp.com, WhatsApp messages, testimony from a colleague, and the discovery of a stolen watch at his home were decisive in sustaining the charges.
In the phone of one of the suspects, Paz was listed under the contact name "EAR", a nickname that investigators linked directly to his alleged function: monitoring police communications and transmitting information to facilitate the robberies. Among the conversations included in the case file are phrases such as "lie low for today", "guy 12:30 I'm heading out on the street", "now I'll tell you a street and I'm heading there", "we're hitting today" and "ear, you're on". For the judges, this content allows them to infer precise coordination and a division of tasks between Paz and at least one of the robbery perpetrators.
The officer was on duty during the incident
A report from the Tactical Operations Unit confirmed that Paz worked as the driver of police vehicle 28913 from 18:00 on 1 June until 08:00 on 3 June. That is, he was working during the early morning hours of 2 June, when the robbery under investigation took place.
Another officer who worked alongside him in Miramar testified that Paz was the one who handled the vehicle's communications because he had greater knowledge of the equipment and could monitor police updates. The same witness recounted an additional incident that caught the investigators' attention: on 26 July, around 01:00 in the morning, Paz showed up in civilian clothes in a dark vehicle with tinted windows and requested the police radio without having any order authorising him to do so.
According to that testimony, the accused remained for approximately three hours following the patrol vehicle in his personal car, sometimes at a distance of around 100 metres. On two occasions, the witness found the communications equipment switched off upon returning to the vehicle after going to get hot water; on both occasions he switched it back on and continued listening to the frequency.
The stolen watch and the photo of the radio
To the collection of testimonial and communications evidence was added the seizure, during a search of Paz's home, of a Rado brand watch with black mesh strap and rectangular dial. The victims recognised it as one of the items taken during the robbery.
The investigators also included a photograph extracted from the accused's iPhone 17 Pro showing a police radio switched on with the identification "MAR DEL PLATA 911 NORTH", next to another phone that was on a group call.
The defence challenged the interpretation of the messages
Paz's lawyer, Mauricio Varela, contested that reading of the evidence. He argued that the conversations had not been recorded on the day of the assault and that the first instance ruling did not specify which concrete communication his client had heard, what information he had obtained or to whom he had transmitted it. He also requested that, in any case, the conduct be classified as aggravated obstruction of justice rather than participation in the robbery.
The Court rejected that submission. It considered that the evidence should be analysed together rather than in isolation, and emphasised as a relevant fact that Paz was on duty during the robbery and had direct access to radio communications.
Classification and charges
With this body of evidence, the judges determined that there are sufficient indications to support that Paz would have collaborated with the criminal plan both before and during its execution. They therefore confirmed the main charge of quintuple aggravated robbery, rejecting the alternative hypothesis of aggravated obstruction of justice that the prosecution had raised.
The charges also include dereliction of duty as a public official, failure to fulfil the obligation to promote the investigation and suppression of crime, and unlawful possession of a civilian firearm.
Pre-trial detention confirmed
The Court rejected the request for release. It based the decision on the gravity of the crimes attributed, the anticipated sentence and the possibility of a custodial sentence, factors which in the tribunal's view justify Paz remaining detained whilst the investigation proceeds.
Source: Google News BO — La Paz