Archive for June 29th, 2017 | Daily archive page

Venezuelan Supreme Court was attacked by a stolen Police helicopter. According to the officialsThe helicopter was allegedly piloted by Oscar Perez, an officer in the Venezuelan investigative police force. As it strafed the court building and the Interior Ministry in Caracas on Tuesday June 27, 2017. Attackers fired gunshots and lobbed grenades. Venezuela asked Interpol to issue a red notice for Perez, according to an official in Venezuela. A red notice alerts authorities in other countries, including border officials, that someone is wanted. The helicopter was found in the seaside state of Vargas, Venezuelan state news agency. It was found by the Venezuelan Air Force in a heavily-wooded area near the municipality of Osma, some 80 kilometers 50 miles northeast of Caracas. It was unclear how a rogue police helicopter could have circled high-profile buildings in the Venezuelan capital without being shot down. Witnesses and locals said that the assault went on for about two hours. No one was killed during the attack officials said. ┬áBefore the attack happen, a man who identified himself as Perez appeared in a video online. He said that an operation was underway to seize democracy back from Venezuela’s “criminal government.” Flanked by a group of armed men in military fatigues and balaclavas, He claimed to be speaking on behalf of a coalition of military, police officers and civil officials. In the video message, Perez said he was a pilot in the special response unit of Venezuela’s Criminal Investigative Police and demanded that Maduro step down. Officials said that Perez was still on the run and the police was undergoing a manhunt for Perez. Opposition lawmakers said they had been prevented by guardsmen from leaving the building for over four hours. Last tuesday night June 27,2017, the Venezuelan Supreme Court issued a decision that grants Venezuelan Ombudsman Tarek Williams Saab a Maduro loyalist powers to investigate, defend and oversee human rights complaints. The decision follows disagreement between the offices of the Ombudsman and the Attorney General as to who is responsible for the investigation and prosecution of human rights abuses.