The trial over the death of Argentine football star Diego Maradona hit another roadblock on Thursday, as questions over the validity of a witness’s testimony and evidence sparked debates that could affect the continuation of the proceedings.

It all comes from Mariana Flichman’s testimony on May 29. She is the medical examiner who prepared Maradona’s discharge papers from the Olivos Clinic, where he underwent surgery to remove a hematoma from his head. 

Prosecutors argued that the revelation that Flichman also worked — and continues to work — for the private health insurer responsible for Maradona’s home care “undermines her credibility.”

“Flichman has acted both as an expert witness and as an interested party in the case, and has sought to influence the testimony of other witnesses,” prosecutor Patricio Ferrari said before playing two audio recordings in which she allegedly requested, on the day of Maradona’s death, that nurses’ reports be sent to her so she could review and amend them before they were signed.

However, the move could have unintended consequences.

The lawyer representing Nancy Forlini, the coordinator at the medical services company involved in Maradona’s care, rejected the claim that prosecutors were unaware of Flichman’s role and warned that, if her testimony and evidence were excluded, he would seek to have the Medical Board’s report annulled in its entirety.

The board concluded that Maradona received “inappropriate, inadequate and reckless” medical care. Its findings have been a cornerstone of the prosecution’s case against the eight defendants accused of failing to provide proper treatment. 

If the report were thrown out, it would deal a significant blow to the prosecution’s case.

Maradona’s family’s lawyer calls for a witness to be detained

At Thursday’s hearing, Fernando Burlando, a lawyer representing Maradona’s family, requested the detention of a witness over alleged false testimony. 

The witness, Nelsa Pérez, 72, was the former nursing coordinator at Medidom, a provider contracted by the company overseeing Maradona’s home medical care.

The first point of contention emerged early in her testimony, when Pérez insisted that Medidom provided home care services rather than home hospitalization, a more intensive level of medical assistance.

Prosecutor Ferrari asked the judges to review her statements from the early stages of the investigation, in which she had described the service as home hospitalization.

Pérez later contradicted another previous statement, claiming she learned of Maradona’s death from television reports. Prosecutors then played an audio message she sent on the day of his death to nursing coordinator Mariano Perroni, one of the eight defendants on trial. 

In the recording, Pérez discusses details surrounding Maradona’s death and offers to help Perroni find legal representation.

Lawyers from across the parties involved asked the judges to remind the witness of the legal consequences of giving false testimony, while Burlando went further and requested her immediate detention. “This amounts to aggravated perjury,” he said.

The judges rejected the request, stating that they had found no evidence that Pérez had intentionally sought to mislead the court. They nevertheless warned her of the consequences of false testimony.