The court that awaits all Spanish politics is entering its decisive phase. Between this month and next July, the show will be closed due to the revelation of secrets against Alvaro García Ortiz, the financial general of the state, a process that in its first three public sessions did not provide an investigation convicting him, but there is more than one evidence to be found in the account of his sitting on the bench. In this final part, one of the pillars of the accusation against García Ortiz will be addressed: the lack of clarity of his electronic devices. At this point, a clash between Fiscalía and the UCO is expected due to the discounts that the Civil Guard unit has included in its reports.
Six other journalists will also appear before the seven judges in the second chamber of the Supreme Court. Some of them, in addition to three of them who testified last week, declared during the instructions that they knew that the Isabel Díaz Ayuso couple had declared their willingness before the Inspectorate of Economic Crimes to confess to their deception of the Hacienda before that information reached García Ortiz. These are the keys to the final three days of the trial.
It’s not clear. Garcia Ortiz’s removal of his phone and computer communications history was one of the key elements that Judge’s coach, Angel Hurtado, relied on in his treatment. Two of the three judges of the Supreme Court of Appeal also invoked it to ratify it. They considered this an indication of Garcia Ortiz’s refusal to “cooperate with the investigation.” The inspector is keen to periodically erase the records of his electronic devices for security reasons, given the confidentiality and sensitivity of the information he deals with. A third judge in the Appeals Chamber, Angel Palomo, issued a scathing special vote against the process, saying that using a defendant as an incriminating element was tantamount to “requiring the defendant to believe in his innocence.”
The issue was not discussed until last week’s sessions. The certificate was recorded only by Esmeralda Razilo, president of the Unidad de Apoyo de la Fiscalía General del Estado, responsible for technological support. Rasillo explains that García Ortiz has changed cars six times since joining Fiscalía del Estado in 2020.
This time we will get into it with the appearance of another member of the state tax authority, Agustín Hidalgo de Murillo, responsible for data protection. But the final moment will arrive at the end of the year, with statements from several UCO agents. This Civil Guard unit registered the tax office and checked its electronic devices. In one of his reports submitted to the trained judge, García Ortiz was said to have jammed his WhatsApp messages on two occasions and on the same day that the Supreme Court sent them, on October 16, 2024. The inspector did not go off on this day, but he confirmed that communications with his collaborators during the evening of March 13 of this day of the year, when the people now sentenced occurred, had previously been cancelled.
The defense submitted an expert report on the errors they intended to introduce into the final stage of instruction, which Hurtado rejected. It aims to show, according to sources close to the defence, that there is no way to conclude which category of contention was omitted at each moment.
Contradictions with UCO. García Ortiz’s defense refutes the content of some UCO reports. Such as the one who concluded that the Malian general had “significant participation in the events that ultimately led to the matter being investigated.” An opponent from the Civil Guard, although there is no indication of its author. Based on an examination of the communications of the Regional Inspector of Madrid, Pilar Rodríguez, the UCO focuses on temporal coincidence. The famous writing of the Ayuso couple’s lawyer confessing to the fraud before the tax office, which Rodriguez sent to García Ortiz on the night of the case, was not recorded as received in the latter’s email until 23.46 hours (although it was sent only a few hours before). Five minutes later, at 23.51, the Cadena SER website published the news, including quotes from the lawyer’s writings. The defense will counter that minutes earlier, at 23.25, the SER had projected the information on the antenna, at the end of the 25 hour programme.
More journalists. This first information from the SER is where it lies at the heart of the nomination, giving great importance to the testimony that will be presented this time by the author of the news, Miguel Angel Campos, Associate Judicial Officer of the Administration. During the instruction phase, Campos announced that on the 13th in the afternoon he arrived in Madrid where he showed the mail from the lawyer of the alleged embezzler, Alberto González Amador. He said he was not extradited, but was allowed to take notes.
Those involved in these accusations, especially among the most active and enthusiastic, Gabriel Rodríguez Ramos, González Amador’s representative, will strive to undermine the credibility of his testimony. They are likely to insist on the amount of time that passed from when the journalist obtained the information until it was published. So they performed last week with another informant eldiario.esWho announced that the mail was available to him a few days ago, but he was unable to publish it until he did not declare its source.
In a similar context, we expect a statement from José Manuel Romero, deputy director of El Pais when he takes office, and three other editors of this periodical. The journalists published WhatsApp messages about the case, which showed that, before the Inspector General became interested in the case, they were asking their sources about Gonzalez Amador’s attempts to reach a settlement with the tax office, before he confessed to his crimes. These are not all testimonies from another La Sexta journalist who announced in court last week that the coach had reported them.
Tax return. The testimony will conclude with the defendant himself, who refused to answer Hurtado’s questions that day, a gesture that was deeply resented by some sectors of the Supreme Court. Now you have to decide whether to face charges or not. In the case of popular groups – from the Colegio de Abogados de Madrid to extremist groups such as Vox, Manos Limpias or Hazte Oír – this seems unlikely. The unknown remains before the specific accusation of Gonzalez Amador.
About The Author
