The defense of Jonathan Andic has come out in force to compensate for the image of the investigated person entering the Martorell court handcuffed. And, for this reason, we have heard a detective declare on RAC1 that the Mossos sergeant does not care "a shit about what happened on the mountain", that he is acting thinking that thanks to the case he will end up appearing on Crims and that the judge in charge of the case is a kind of substitute figurehead without personality who the police have "brainwashed" into dictating the actions that suit the Mossos. Simultaneously, the defense has distributed among some media the video of Isak Andic stumbling, ending up on the ground, with the intention that we understand that, if he had knee arthritis, why couldn't he have accidentally stumbled also on Montserrat and fallen to his death on the day of his death?The defense of the founder of Mango's son will know what it's doing, but this whole line of communication is pathetic. In an extraordinarily painful case for the family and considerably sensitive for the brand, it adds the missing touch of morbidity to invite society to choose, as if this were a derby, between a crooked cop who acts on his own and manipulates an inexperienced judge, and a son so greedy and unscrupulous that he is capable of parricide.19th-century serial novels were already full of public judgments about scandalous cases that divided society. We haven't advanced much. Today, reputational communication is played out without ethical limits, because facts don't matter as much as the narrative about them reaching people's gut so they are thoroughly convinced.
