• Events Daniel Sancho's lawyer speaks: "He knows what he did"
  • Television Rain of criticism to The summer program for accessing the villa in which Daniel Sancho committed the murder

We don't learn. This is the conclusion that is reached every time there is a gruesome crime and the televisions echo. It happened with the girls of Alcàsser, it happened withthe murder of little Gabriel, the death of Julen, the boy who fell into a well, and it is happening with the case of Daniel Sancho.

The events are a source of food for the media, but especially for television, and more if we take into account that it is summer. The visual always engages more than the written.

Since last Saturday the news broke that Rodolfo Sancho's son, Daniel, had confessed to the Thai police to have murdered and dismembered Edwin Artieta, all the press has turned to the case. Not only for being a murder, but for how the crime has been, for who the confessed murderer is and for everything that surrounds the case.

Nobody says that the media and televisions do not focus much of their content on this crime, which has already become the news of the summer, nor was it criticizable to report the disappearance of little Gabriel, the attempts to save Julen's life, or the case of the girls of Alcàsser or any of the cases that generate so much interest. The problem is when certain lines are crossed, when you turn on the television and the viewer finds it more than shocking to see a presenter marking each part in which the victim was dismembered or to see a reporter inside the room in which the crime was committed.

In fact, all televisions, with the exception of the public broadcaster, whose treatment of the case is limited to the information of the day in the news and current affairs tables, are turning spectacularly with crime.

Antena 3 and Telecinco, for example, have opened a war to see which of the two gives the exclusive of the day on the murder of Edwin Artieta. Of course, these have been joined by Cuatro, which has the programs of Nacho Abad, an expert in information on events and the one who has given the most unknown data about the investigation.

It is also the one that is doing best. Last Tuesday his program En boca de todos made audience record and, at night, Código 10, which he presents with David Aleman, made audience record of its entire history. What does this prove? That indeed the viewer is interested in the crime. But we already knew that, and the televisions knew it better than anyone.

The thing begins to worry, to bring to mind other scenes of yesteryear with other crimes, when the information begins to become a spectacle. When a show enters what they have called The Room of Horror, the room in which the crime was allegedly committed. As the reporter goes through each room of the same and describes what happened in each of them.

"The two of them were sitting on this mattress. Daniel wanted to leave the relationship, Edwin opposes. Apparently she wanted to force him to have sex. A struggle begins, punches and Edwin hits twice against this sink and dies shortly after. (...) Daniel gets very nervous, goes around the room and decides to drag Edwin's body to the shower to clean all the blood, "begins the story of The summer program inside the hotel room where Edwin Artieta was murdered.

The reporter goes to the kitchen, shows the shelves and trays of the refrigerator that, as he describes, Daniel Sancho took out to make room in the refrigerator: "(...) to have more space to store plastic bags before throwing them into the sea."

"Inside this closet is the safe in which they kept the 80,000 euros that Edwin brought and that, perhaps, could also be a motive for the crime," continues the tour of the room to end with a "... Edwin didn't spend a night in this idyllic setting." "It's shocking to see the room," said the host of the program after finishing the report. Sure enough, shocking.

Because there is no doubt that the crime of Edwin Artieta is shocking, but they are making it even more shocking if possible.

The examples this week of television coverage of the case of Daniel Sancho multiply as the hours go by. "The first words of Edwin's sister..."; the exclusive of Edwin's threatening messages to Daniel and that the Thai Police have found the mobile phone of Rodolfo Sancho's son; the first statements of Rodolfo Sancho; the journey that Daniel Sancho made to get rid of Edwin's remains; the hours before, the hours after, the reasons for Daniel Sancho to "dismember the body of the victim in 14 parts". It adds up and goes on. Endless headlines, hours and more hours of television dedicated to crime. And when you have already told what you can tell, what do you do?

And, of course, heated debates from dozens of collaborators who, as experts, are sitting on television sets. This week, Espejo Público lived a strong clash live between Bárbara Royo, lawyer and collaborator of the program, and Sonia Ferrer, another of the collaborators of this summer.

The first did not hesitate to express her discomfort at the serious accusation she is receiving in recent days when giving her opinion on the crime: "Look, I want to start by saying that Iam up to my nose that we always have to be justifying ourselves by talking about criminal law and human rights. And that they are criticizing all of us who are analyzing the case from the objectivity of criminal law, saying that we are whitewashing Daniel Sancho because he is Spanish and because the victim is Colombian."

"No, gentlemen! We are telling what there is, a criminal process. Of course, if he is guilty, he must serve prison time and he must be convicted. Of course, we are against the death penalty because it is an inhuman penalty and we are in favor of the fundamental rights of Spaniards, Colombians, Thais and all humans, "added the lawyer very angry.

And then Sonia Ferrer came in, who sided with those who are launching these criticisms. Which made his partner even angrier. "You also have to understand that many people have been listening to speculations from the first minute, trying to justify or understand why they have felt cornered and have done what they have done," Ferrer said. "No one has justified anything. Look Sonia is that it seems that you are just like those who are criticizing us. I have not heard anyone justify a murder. What I've heard is people trying to find an explanation. Because there is always an atrocious fact, behind it there is an explanation so that humans can understand how someone can do this, "answered Royo. Yes, one more quarrel, but a quarrel that reflects well the division that is taking place before the treatment that is being given to the case.

It has not been the only time to forget in Espejo Público these days with the Daniel Sancho case. In an attempt to find all the possible content and try to fill the empty hours of programming in a month like August, Espejo Público took the Thai model and DJ Two Jupa to talk about the conditions of Thai prisons, where Daniel Sancho will spend his sentence -it is not yet known which- Daniel Sancho.

In the program they explained that the conditions of these prisons are very bad, since they eat only once a day, there are many more people than they should per module and the prisoners do not have a mattress and a pillow to sleep on.

Two Yupa explained in the daily magazine that, although the prisons of his country have a bad international reputation, they have been "moderating" in recent years, especially those in Bangkok and Koh Sumai, where the alleged murderer remains.

The commentator admitted that the things that are said are true, but that she agrees with them suffering these conditions because she believes they deserve it: "I'm sorry, but I'm very hard with that. I am of punishment, punishment." But the DJ had not finished and added that she was in favor of not having "bed and pillow because if not, it would not be a prison". Faced with such words, Lorena García had to stop her and cut off her words: "But there are human rights, such as sleeping in a bed, no matter how savage the prisoner is."

As Groucho Marx said in the mythical scene of The Marx Brothers Go West: "More wood, more wood." And more wood is what has continued to be poured.

Dealing with events on television is never easy. You have to have a lot of left hand and many boards to avoid falling where so many times it has been denounced that you do not fall: in the show. Because the problem of turning a crime into a spectacle, and more a crime like that of Edwin Artieta, is that it is transformed into a Dantesque spectacle.

The funny thing is that whenever this happens, it is always criticized, it is always recognized and there is always a posteriori analysis of what has been done wrong and what limits have been crossed. But the story always starts over and always ends the same way.

  • Daniel Sancho Case
  • Telecinco
  • Antenna 3