Mexico Attorney General’s Office calls on US to hand over key evidence regarding arrest of ‘El Mayo’ Zambada

The Mexico Attorney General’s Office (FGR) has broken its silence after three weeks of suspicions and inconsistencies surrounding the arrest of Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada and Joaquín Guzmán López in the United States, and the murder of Héctor Melesio Cuén Ojeda in Culiacán, the capital of Sinaloa. The ministerial authorities said Thursday in a statement that their U.S. counterparts have not shared key elements to clarify how El Mayo and Joaquín Guzmán López, the one of the sons of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, were detained on U.S. soil, such as information on the aircraft that transported them, the pilot who flew it, and the official procedures that allowed them to land at a rural airport in New Mexico. The FGR also exposed errors and omissions in the investigation carried out by the Sinaloa Prosecutor’s Office to clarify the murder of Cuén, regarding the autopsy, the investigations at the crime scene, the preservation of the body, and the video that has been released of the alleged attack on the politician, one of the main pieces of evidence presented by the state authorities.

This is the most complete statement published by the Attorney General’s Office since both events took place on July 25. The Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office explained that its investigation seeks to clear up the unknowns surrounding the arrest of Zambada and Guzmán López, two of the leaders of the Sinaloa Cartel, particularly what took place on Mexican territory in the hours before the arrests were made public by the United States. Mexican authorities are not convinced by the explanations offered by Washington, which claims it was taken by surprise after the kingpins appeared at the Doña Ana airport outside the border city of El Paso. “[The fundamental evidence] is directly linked to an illegal flight; to a plane with cloned registration plates; and to the absolutely irregular conduct of the person piloting the plane, who concealed all the information about his flight in Mexican territory until he arrived at the border, where he only gave notice of his approach and landing in U.S. territory, where they were already waiting for him,” the communiqué states.

The evidence is still in the hands of the United States, according to the Attorney General’s Office. The Mexican agency stated that it carried out ministerial and police investigations at the Doña Ana airport, as U.S. ambassador Ken Salazar had already confirmed, but admitted that “the necessary data were not obtained to establish the aforementioned responsibilities.” The FGR said that other efforts, led by its intelligence agencies, have managed to determine “the location of the runway near the city of Culiacán; the clandestine and unreported take-off and flight within the national territory; as well as the approval that said aircraft obtained to land in U.S. territory.” This is the first precise information that the governments of the United States and Mexico have provided about the departure point of the aircraft. The U.S. Embassy said last Friday that it was “of the understanding that the flight began in Sinaloa.” The FGR promised to give the exact location as the investigations progress.

The Attorney General’s Office requires the United States to provide 11 relevant pieces of evidence. Five of them are related to the procedures that the aircraft undertook to reach New Mexico: the U.S. Border Patrol’s authorization for El Mayo and Guzmán López’s arrival flight; the passenger registry that must be submitted before take-off to the immigration authorities; the report from the U.S. radar security system; the immigration documents of the pilots and passengers, such as their visas and passports, as well as the customs record on the people who were on the plane and their belongings.

It also requests from the U.S. Department of Justice the identification data of the pilot and the plane, such as its registration, serial number, flight history and the legal documents that support that its registration is in order before the U.S. authorities and international agencies. The FGR also requests a formal explanation of the registration irregularities that Washington provided in the hours following the arrest of both kingpins: “If the serial number that appears on the door of the aircraft, as well as the registration number N287KA, are legal; and if historically they correspond to that aircraft today, or if there is any irregularity in this regard.”

It is the most detailed public account ever made of what the FGR is demanding from the White House to determine whether crimes such as illegal flight and kidnapping were committed in Mexico. The Prosecutor’s Office also explained why the crime of treason is included in the investigation file, a point that was also controversial and implied that Guzmán López is accused of that offense, and not Zambada. Mexico defines one of the definitions that can be applied to a case of treason as when “a person is illegally deprived of his or her liberty in the national territory, to deliver him or her to the authorities of another country, or to transfer him or her out of Mexico for such purpose.” El Mayo claims that Guzmán López, his godson, betrayed him and kidnapped him. If it is proven that El Chapo’s son delivered his former partner to U.S. authorities, he can be formally charged in Mexico. The sentences range from five to 40 years in prison. “That is the main reason for the investigation that the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office initiated regarding the case,” it said.

The murder of Héctor Cuén

At least two versions have emerged following the murder of Cuén, a former mayor of Culiacán and one of the most controversial figures in Sinaloa state politics. The Sinaloa Attorney General’s Office maintains that the 68-year-old politician died during an attempted robbery to steal his pickup truck. El Mayo said in a letter that Cuén was killed after being summoned to a meeting with him and Sinaloa Governor Rubén Rocha. State authorities say two men shot Cuén at a gas station in La Presita, 12 kilometers from Huertos del Pedregal, the place where Zambada says they met. The capo claims the murder took place at 11:00 a.m., but prosecutors said the time of death was 12 hours later, according to their medical records. Rocha, a political adversary of Cuén, denies being involved in both cases, and having attended the meeting or having any links to drug trafficking.

The FGR has detected errors and inconsistencies in the state prosecutor’s proceedings. “The autopsy does not correctly establish the immediate cadaveric signs, temperature, thanatological signs, lividity, nor the correct description and evolution of the body,” it says. Federal authorities say that the protocols and measures to preserve Cuén’s body were not followed, and that his body should not have been allowed to be cremated before the crime was solved.

Regarding the body, the FGR said that there were four shots in the legs, as the Sinaloa Prosecutor’s Office had already announced, but also “a strong hematoma on the head.” State authorities support the robbery theory based on the testimony of a former collaborator of Cuén, who said that he was driving his vehicle and had been an eyewitness to the shooting. On Monday, they released a video that supports this theory, captured by the security cameras of the La Presita gas station. But the images raised doubts in public opinion because they are not conclusive in showing the alleged robbery, nor the shots that were supposedly fired, or who was inside the truck or if it was, in fact, the victim’s vehicle.

“The video from the gas station has sound and only one shot is heard,” reveals the FGR, which took over the murder investigation this week. “The three employees of the gas station do not report hearing gunshots,” it adds. Another finding of the federal authorities is that there were blood stains in the bed of the pickup and that, despite this, “there are no expert reports or determinations in this regard.” “The scene of the crime was not processed, nor was the vehicle,” reports the Prosecutor’s Office. Nor was a mechanics of the events presented, a criminalistic study detailing step-by-step how the crime took place.

Three weeks after the events of July 25, state authorities have not been able to give a convincing explanation as to who killed Cuén and why, and they have blamed the media impact of El Mayo’s letter, which links the murder with his own arrest and has caused federal and Sinaloa authorities to work around the clock. The FGR’s position has lent official status to the unanswered questions that have marked both cases and represents a blow to the credibility of the Sinaloa Prosecutor’s Office.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition