The trial into the death of Diego Maradona has entered a critical phase in San Isidro, Buenos Aires, where prosecutors, family members and medical staff are battling over who bears responsibility for the football icon’s final days after his death on Nov. 25, 2020, at age 60, two weeks after brain surgery, with the central question focused on whether his home care amounted to fatal negligence.
In testimony that reshaped the narrative, psychologist Carlos Diaz told the court Maradona suffered from three chronic conditions: substance addiction, bipolar disorder and a narcissistic personality disorder.
While his struggles with cocaine and alcohol had long been public, the additional diagnoses had never been disclosed, adding weight to the defense’s argument that the former World Cup winner was a complex, high-risk patient whose death was rooted in natural causes rather than malpractice.
Diaz, himself among the seven defendants, described his first meeting with Maradona in October 2020, recalling a frail but reflective figure.
He said those close to the Argentine star linked his substance use to the emotional extremes of elite sport, where success and frustration often fed destructive cycles.
Despite that, Diaz insisted he saw signs of commitment to recovery.
The defense has leaned heavily on that portrayal, arguing that Maradona’s long history of addiction and erratic behavior made consistent treatment difficult and unpredictable.
Prosecutors, however, have pushed back, framing the case as one of abandonment and reckless decision-making in a moment that required strict medical supervision.
That tension sharpened with the testimony of Maradona’s daughter, Gianinna, who accused the medical team of manipulating the family into agreeing to home hospitalization in Tigre following surgery for a brain clot.
She told the court doctors assured them the residence would be fully equipped for serious care, a promise she now says proved dangerously misleading.
“The manipulation was total and horrible,” she said, singling out neurosurgeon Leopoldo Luque, psychiatrist Agustina Cosachov and Diaz. She described trusting their guidance, only to believe later that those decisions left her father without adequate medical support.
A key issue in the trial is whether Maradona should have remained in a clinical setting rather than being treated at home.
Prosecutors argue the decision stripped him of necessary monitoring and timely intervention, contributing directly to his death from heart failure and acute pulmonary edema, a condition marked by fluid buildup in the lungs.
Gianinna’s voice broke as she recounted the moment she rushed to her father’s bedside, only to be told by emergency responders there was nothing they could do.
Her testimony underscored the emotional weight carried by the family, who say they were guided, and ultimately misled, at every step.
Seven members of Maradona’s medical team face charges of homicide with possible intent, a serious accusation that implies they pursued a course of action despite knowing it could end in death.
If convicted, they could receive prison sentences ranging from eight to 25 years. All have denied wrongdoing, maintaining that Maradona’s death was the inevitable result of his long-standing health issues.
The trial itself comes after a false start.
An earlier proceeding was annulled when it emerged that one of the judges had been involved in a clandestine documentary about the case, forcing a restart under a new panel.
This second trial, expected to last several months, has drawn intense public attention in Argentina, where Maradona’s death during the COVID-19 pandemic triggered nationwide mourning and mass gatherings despite restrictions.
