Villarejo case: The National Court did not investigate the subpoenas to Villarejo to find out what their true content was


The first great process of the macrocause Tandem That is Villarejo case is seen for sentencing. These are the parts called The iron (part 2), Ground (part 3) and Painter (part 6). But there is a risk that the whole affair will be ruined if, as the information which treats Audience, the court does not judge what would really be hidden behind the content of the orders that were made to Villarejo and his accomplices.

Indeed, the documentation to which this newspaper had access, as well as the complete analysis of the Commissioner’s diaries and a rigorous financial forensic study, allow us to conclude that survey of most over 30 pieces of the case has disappeared in the sense that the retired commissioner and his collaborators have marked with the evidence they left behind and with their depositions at the Audiencia Nacional.

This is the case, for example, of the part Planet, in which Villarejo’s defense developed a strategy to convince that this media group paid the commissioner 40,000 euros in 2014 to help him overturn an arbitration award, when at the time the award was irreversible For years.

It also happened with “trap” project BBVA’s first order in Villarejo, where an impossible assault by Luis del Rivero on the bank’s board of directors takes place, which in reality concealed a lucrative stock market media operation for his company.

The strategy repeats itself in the room Wine, in which an attempt is made to explain the commissioner’s collaboration as a mission to prevent Sacyr, the construction company of Luis del Rivero (the so-called “wounded”), from carrying out an assault on Repsol when in reality, what it was about saving this construction company from bankruptcy.

The same happens with the rest of the pieces. Audience analyzed over the years. and it happened also with the three whose judgment is expected in the coming days.

Numerous legal sources consulted over the years by this newspaper agree that this is the key to the deal. If someone is caught committing a crime (for example, paying an active police officer for the services they provide due to their police status), one of the most effective ways to obtain the record of the case during the investigation, reduce convictions or even obtain an acquittal, is to ensure that a story completely different from the true (and more advantageous for those involved) is studied exclusively throughout. throughout the investigation phase, and that it is ultimately the one that will appear in the indictment. That’s to say, It’s not about completely escaping justice.but to be tried for a crime carrying a much lower penalty.

Moreover, with this ruse, those involved have the possibility of to obtain during the trial the “pardon” of the false wronged, as seen in the piece that affects the husband of Ana Rosa Quintana; That is even acquittal or file if during the trial phase the defendants reveal the logical inconsistencies that accompany all fictional stories.

The key to this whole process is ensure that only one possible story is studied from start to finish of the training process. That is, the investigation does not request or order a procedure to verify any other alternative. This is the story that must be included in the indictment, which leads to the trial phase.

This is the most important part of the process, because the magistrates who will then judge the case in court (other than the investigating judge) they will not be able to free themselves from the facts that the order of the examining magistrate has established. So much so that, if during the trial the farce created emerges, it would be necessary to return to the starting line: to reopen an investigation to investigate the real story. That’s to say, in the worst case, cunning saves time.

Villarejo’s reports are just a ‘parapet’

Yes the judges know the strategy of Villarejo and his accomplices since the beginning of this whole macrocause. The first client and person under investigation in the case, lawyer Francisco Menéndez, explained during the preliminary phase of the case – in particular during the investigation procedure of the Public Prosecutor’s Office – that Villarejo’s reports where he captured the alleged orders given to him they were just a “parapet” to hide the real reason for the succulent monetary transfers that passed through the bank accounts linked to Villarejo.

Fragment of lawyer Francisco Menéndez’s statement on the Villarejo ‘King’ report. Folio 46 of the first volume of the macrocause ‘Tándem’. Own production

Although this statement It is collected on page 46 of the first volume of the entire macrocause Tandemduring the judicial phase which began in November 2017 and in the examination of the documents the court did not question the stories built by Villarejo and his accomplices and clients whom the first respondent described as a “parapet”. On the contrary.

In addition, many media and journalists have reproduced these same stories to build a story that is far from what really happened, according to the conclusions drawn from the detailed study of each “project” entrusted to Villarejo carried out by this newspaper. with its own means.

Extensive indicative tables require, at a minimum, study these alternatives to confirm or refute them. In fact, in none of the open rooms of the Villarejo caseexcept in one case, interest was expressed in studying problem that really forced the payers to interact with Villarejo and his accomplices. The exception is the first piece, which affected this first intermediary under contract, Francisco Menéndez; the only one who was promoted by the economic crimes team of the Tax Agency, which does not depend on the Interior.

For all that, Audience highlights the research carried out over the years for the three pieces judged (Painter, The iron Yes Ground) and shows the real motivations behind the commissions in Villarejo.

Click on the pictures to access each information

.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *