In the northern Buenos Aires district of San Isidro, the trial over Diego Maradona’s death has moved through competing accounts of the final weeks of one of football’s most enduring figures. Seven health professionals are accused of negligence in the home care provided to Maradona after surgery, with several defendants now placing responsibility on one another.
Home recovery in Tigre under scrutiny
Maradona died in 2020, aged 60, while recovering from minor neurosurgery at a house in Tigre, in Buenos Aires province. The former Argentina captain suffered cardiorespiratory arrest and pulmonary oedema during a period of medical care at home.
The proceedings began in April in San Isidro, close to the Argentine capital. The defendants include a doctor, psychiatrist, psychologist and nurses who were involved in Maradona’s convalescence.
- Seven healthcare workers are standing trial over alleged failures in Maradona’s treatment.
- The case concerns the arrangements made for his recovery following neurosurgery.
- All of the accused deny criminal responsibility.
- They could each face prison sentences of up to 25 years if convicted.
Forlini points to medical leadership
Medical coordinator Nancy Forlini rejected the allegation that she failed to provide necessary equipment and staff. In testimony on Tuesday, she argued that she could not be blamed for failing to arrange items that had never been requested.
Forlini directed criticism towards neurosurgeon Leopoldo Luque and psychiatrist Agustina Cosachov, who are also defendants. She said Cosachov had told her that decisions rested with Luque and Cosachov, and that the pair held the authority over the care plan.
Defendants offer contrasting accounts
Luque, in turn, maintained that Forlini bore responsibility for the wider medical arrangements. He said his own role was limited to neurosurgical follow-up and insisted that he was not Maradona’s treating physician.
Pedro Di Spagna also denied being the clinical doctor responsible for the football icon’s care. He told the court that he had been unable to see Maradona on his final two attempted visits, saying he was frustrated at being prevented from doing his job and was instructed to leave.
Though their defences differ, each of the seven professionals has maintained innocence as the San Isidro court examines how Maradona’s final recovery period was managed.
