With Bertón dead, she would need his brother's cooperation to access it.
In Mendoza, a May 29 hearing will determine the legal fate of three people accused of killing Eduardo Bertón, a beloved physical education teacher and handball pioneer, during what appeared to be a robbery at his home in August 2024. Yet beneath the surface of a violent crime lies a more deliberate question: whether a $150,000 joint bank account in Miami, opened months before the killing, transformed an act of theft into something far more calculated. The law must now decide not only who pulled the trigger, but whether all three suspects shared equally in a plan that may have been set in motion long before the afternoon two women arrived at Bertón's door.
- A single shot to the head ended Eduardo Bertón's life on August 10, 2024, but security cameras had already recorded the choreography of his killing—two women distracting him while a man slipped inside and cut the wires.
- Prosecutors are pushing for murder charges and life sentences for all three suspects, arguing the robbery and killing were jointly planned and equally executed, while defense attorneys fight to reduce charges and keep one suspect out of prison on health grounds.
- A $150,000 joint bank account opened in Miami just four months before the murder has emerged as the case's most unsettling detail, suggesting the crime may have been motivated not by the cash and drone found in the house, but by six figures waiting in Florida.
- The account's structure—requiring Córdoba's signature alongside Bertón's brother to access funds after his death—places her at the center of a possible premeditated motive that the prosecution is pressing the court to recognize.
- On May 29, Judge Leonardo Camacho will rule on how charges are classified, whether the trial proceeds before a jury, and whether Córdoba will face proceedings from home or from custody, decisions that will define the entire shape of what comes next.
On May 29, a judge in Mendoza will decide how three people accused of killing Eduardo Bertón will face trial—and whether all three will answer for murder. The question at the heart of the hearing is whether this was a robbery that turned deadly, or something colder and more deliberate, planned around a bank account in Miami.
Bertón was a physical education teacher known in Maipú for helping establish handball as a sport in Mendoza. On August 10, 2024, two women—Claudia Córdoba and Roxana Núñez—arrived at his home in a Fiat Palio. Security cameras recorded them walking to the back patio, where they spoke with Pablo Peña, 59, for several minutes. While the women kept Bertón occupied outside, Peña entered the house with a gun and cut the camera wires—though the cameras had already captured him doing it. About an hour later, the women left. Bertón went inside. Peña was waiting. A single shot to the head killed him instantly. Peña and Núñez then returned, set the house on fire, and left with two firearms, a notebook, and a drone.
Prosecutor Claudia Ríos argues all three shared equal responsibility in planning and carrying out both the robbery and the murder, and is seeking life sentences for each in a jury trial. The defense has pushed back, with Córdoba's lawyer arguing she should face only simple robbery charges—a classification that would allow bail—while the other defendants' attorneys have also sought lesser charges.
Running beneath the legal arguments is a detail that darkens the entire picture. In April 2024, four months before the killing, Bertón and Córdoba traveled together to the United States and accessed a joint bank account in Miami holding approximately $150,000. The account was structured so that after Bertón's death, only his brother and Córdoba could withdraw the funds. When Bertón's brother traveled to Miami after the murder, the bank confirmed what was waiting there. The prosecutor has suggested this was the real motive—not the cash or the drone found in the house, but the six figures in Florida that required Córdoba's presence to unlock.
Judge Leonardo Camacho will rule on the charge classifications, the trial format, and Córdoba's request for house arrest on health grounds. His decisions on May 29 will determine the shape of everything that follows.
On May 29, a judge in Mendoza will decide how three people accused of killing Eduardo Bertón will face trial—and whether all three will be charged with murder, or whether some will answer for lesser crimes. The decision hinges on a question that has shadowed the investigation since the beginning: Was this a robbery that turned deadly, or was it something colder, something planned around a bank account in Miami?
Bertón was a physical education teacher, known in Maipú for helping establish handball as a sport in Mendoza. On the afternoon of August 10, 2024, two women—Claudia Córdoba and Roxana Núñez—arrived at his house in a Fiat Palio. Security cameras captured their arrival. They walked to the back patio and spoke with a man for several minutes. That man was Pablo Peña, 59, who would later be accused of pulling the trigger. While the women occupied Bertón's attention outside, Peña entered the house with a gun and cut the security camera wires—though the cameras had already recorded him doing it.
About an hour later, the women left. Bertón went inside. Peña was waiting. A single shot to the head killed him instantly. Minutes afterward, Peña and Núñez returned to the house and set it on fire, trying to destroy evidence. They left with two firearms, a notebook, and a drone.
The prosecutor, Claudia Ríos, believes all three suspects deserve the same punishment. She argues they shared equal responsibility in planning and executing both the robbery and the murder. She wants all three tried before a jury, where they could each face life in prison. The defense has other ideas. Córdoba's lawyer argues she should face only simple robbery charges—a crime that allows bail. Núñez and Peña's lawyers have also pushed for lesser classifications.
But there is another thread running through this case, one that raises a darker possibility. In April 2024, four months before the killing, Bertón and Córdoba traveled together to the United States. They opened or accessed a joint bank account in Miami. When Bertón's brother traveled to Miami after the murder, the bank confirmed what was in that account: approximately $150,000. The account was set up so that after Bertón's death, only two people could withdraw the money—his brother and Córdoba.
The prosecutor has suggested this was the real motive. Not the notebook or the drone or the $11,000 in cash hidden inside the house, but the six figures waiting in Florida, locked behind a requirement that Córdoba's signature be present. With Bertón dead, she would need his brother's cooperation to access it. Whether that was the plan from the start, or whether it simply became an opportunity, remains part of what the May 29 hearing will begin to clarify.
Judge Leonardo Camacho will decide not only how the charges will be classified, but also the format of the trial itself—whether it will be a conventional proceeding or a jury trial. He will also rule on Córdoba's request to serve under house arrest on health grounds. The hearing will set the shape of everything that follows.
Citas Notables
The prosecutor believes all three suspects shared equal responsibility in planning and executing both the robbery and the murder.— Prosecutor Claudia Ríos's position
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why would the prosecutor argue that all three deserve the same charge when their roles seem so different—one pulled the trigger, the others were outside?
Because the prosecutor sees them as a unit. She believes they planned this together, that the women's presence in the backyard wasn't coincidence. They were part of the scheme from the beginning.
And the Miami account—how much weight does that carry in the case?
It's the question underneath everything. If the account was just a detail, it wouldn't matter. But $150,000 is substantial. And the fact that Córdoba needed Bertón's brother to access it after his death—that changes the shape of motive.
So the defense is arguing she didn't know about the money?
The defense is arguing she didn't participate in the murder itself. That's different. Whether she knew about the account, whether she wanted it—those are separate questions the trial will have to answer.
What happens if the judge agrees with the prosecution?
Then all three face a jury trial with the possibility of life sentences. If he agrees with the defense, Córdoba might walk away with a robbery conviction and a chance at bail.
And the judge decides this in one hearing?
He decides the charges and the trial format. The actual guilt or innocence—that comes later, in front of a jury or in a conventional trial. May 29 is just the threshold.