Tuesday, December 7

Bárcenas’ driver asks the National Court to remove him from Kitchen because he thought it was legal




The one who was the driver of the ex-treasurer of the PP Luis Bárcenas, Sergio Ríos, has appealed his prosecution in the Kitchen operation with a letter in which he asks the National Court to remove him from the equation because he had the “Full conviction” that he collaborated as an informant in a legal police operation and there is still a lack of procedures that could support this point.

In his brief, to which ABC had access, the defense of Ríos exercised by the lawyer Javier Vasallo assures that the order for which he has been processed along with nine other people and among them the former minister Jorge Fernández Díaz, is null because it is not sufficiently motivated and his argumentation, “misguided” and “circumstantial”. He even calls it “arbitrary.”

“Nor have the evidence proposed by the Public Ministry and which it considers essential to sustain the accusation, claiming the Court to which I am writing, in terms of strict defense, close an instruction hastily after more than 4 years without practicing all the necessary and fundamental investigation procedures to obtain the material truth, “he says.

Regarding the crime of revealing secrets, which he is charged with in relation to a Bárcenas mobile that he transferred from one point to another, he points out that «I was fulfilling, as a private escort, a commission that the family itself had entrusted to him, and with the absolute and full conviction that he was complying with a judicial and police mandate.

«This supposes that there was no fraud or intentionality in their actions that they were all atypical and irrelevant from a legal point of view, it is not possible to be charged for the aforementioned crime, “he adds.

Regarding the charges of prevarication and embezzlement, he argues that at the Kitchen dates he was not yet a police officer and therefore not a public official; and he refutes the bribery claim noting that sufficient measures have not been taken to prove his innocence nor are he charged with specific facts.

«My client, as has been accredited in the instruction, acted with conscience and full conviction that he was doing it by court order and police, collaborating with the pertinent authorities to avoid the commission of new crimes or to help the discovery of the material truth and the investigation of the facts that were being investigated in the Gürtel plot, “he adds.

“Pino limited himself to deriving police officers”

The prosecution has also been appealed by the former Deputy Director of Operations of the Police, Eugenio Pino, who focuses his argument on that there was a legal operation of which he, in addition, little knew, and has ended up being processed by reason of his position with a resolution that “Makes waters.”

According to his defense, “there is not the slightest indication that Eugenio Pino was the director of any specific operation.” “What he limited himself to doing was to derive police officers, at that time Corps Commissioners and unit managers, the development of police functions, regardless of whether at some point, actively or passively, he had biased knowledge” , Add.

Thus, he alleges that “there is not the slightest indication” that he entrusted the commissioners José Manuel Villarejo and Enrique García Castaño with “obtaining the trust” of Sergio Ríos “for a spurious purpose” and “Nor can the illegal character of that police collaborator be upheld». In the same way, it affects the absence of indications that “he ordered or authorized an act of theft of documents” from the ex-treasurer of the PP.

The loot does not appear

For Pino’s defense, “it is unheard of that the investigator of the case gives a biased value to the intervened note to Villarejo where it talks about the location of documents without any specification of what type of documentation” is, when in his opinion, what makes it clear is “the existence of an evident police-judicial interest” and furthermore, “it is a draft.”

In this sense, the letter to which ABC had access qualifies as “surprising” that it was not specified what was stolen from Bárcenas or when, since “not even” he has been able to explain what information it was “but rather He has joined the bandwagon and with resounding imprecision he talks about a theft of documentation that clearly interests him».

He emphasizes that “apart from Villarejo”, no other defendant has said that the operation responded to “spurious reasons” and “It is not logical to think that someone who supposedly records without rest the private conversations that they may have with their interlocutors” it does so out of “good faith.” In fact, he questions the plausibility of those tapes.

In general, it alleges that “there is no type of indication” of the “illicit end of the police operation”, even more so considering that the Police “have a duty to investigate.” It adds, for the same reason, that the prosecution of those who were two people very close to their work in the DAO, the policemen José Ángel Fuentes Gago and Bonifacio Díaz Sevillano, It is also “unsustainable” and “one more example of the irrationality” of the prosecution of this case.

See them


Leave a Reply

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