The prosecution considers that Vox has tried to manage the judicial times of the case in which the former vice president of the Generalitat Valenciana Mónica Oltra was investigated for the management of her ex-husband’s abuse of a warded minor. He censures that the “persistence and extension” of the case over time has been due, to a large extent, to the “effort of the various accusations made,” among which is the ultra party.
The case against Oltra, which forced him to resign, was archived by the judge at the beginning of April, a decision that the Prosecutor’s Office decided to support. However, the dismissal was appealed by the accusations, both by the victim of the abuse of the Compromís leader’s ex-husband, and by Vox, the party that joined the cause as did an association led by the former founder of the ultra party Cristina I continued.
The prosecutor has already decided not to appeal the file. Now, he has also opposed the resources that have presented the accusations. In his response, he accuses Vox of trying to “usurp control of the tempo of the instruction (…) either by hastening its end or by lengthening it to suit the interests of the parties.” Furthermore, he criticizes the substance of the ultra formation’s writing which, according to the prosecutor, does not offer “a minimally articulated alternative either in terms of tactics or in the corresponding reasoning” to the author of the file but rather “a few, confusing and fragmentary arguments that attempt to construct a kind of incriminating reasoning “by exclusion.”
In the filing order, the judge considered that there were “no indications of the commission of any crime.” “It has not been proven, not even at the level of the evidence, that Oltra, nor any other person from the Ministry, issued any order, instruction, order or indication” to hide or carry out an extrajudicial investigation into the case of abuse of the ex-husband. of politics, as the accusations claimed. “It has been reiterated ad nauseam that there is not a single indication that any order or instruction was issued from the management positions of the Ministry aimed at hiding the facts or discrediting the minor,” the judge noted in the order.
Both Vox and the private prosecution, which represents the victim, expressed in their appeals to the case file their consideration of an “incongruent” decision by the judge due to the pronouncements he had made during the investigation of the case. Thus, they make explicit reference to the reasoned statement in which the judge asked the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community to charge Oltra (then accused of her) and even to the tax report that supported this request. Then, at the beginning of the investigation, the judge expressed his suspicion that the staff of the department, of which Oltra was the head, carried out an investigation parallel to the judicial one and that the minor “far from being protected, was the object of an unjustified persecution.” For its part, the Prosecutor’s Office believed that Oltra had issued a verbal order to “distort the credibility of the minor” and hide the facts and that there was a “strong indication that said order was issued by the accused. [Mónica Oltra]” due to the fact that all those who intervened and who were also accused, “always maintained the same exculpatory version of the Ministry of Equality.” “Of such antecedents – says the prosecutor – only the first shares authorship with the appealed resolution,” he responds, in reference to the fact that it is the same judge who initiated the investigation that has now been archived and possibly also to the fact that the prosecutor who supported The accusation was made by the senior prosecutor Teresa Gisbert, recently appointed prosecutor of the Juvenile Coordinating Chamber, she is not the one who now acts on behalf of the Prosecutor’s Office. In any case, she appeals that the difference between some assessments and others is due to the procedural moment. “It is, therefore, to a certain extent fallacious to pretend that what was said, in the first step, cannot be reevaluated at another time, in the light of broader information and with completely heterogeneous procedural consequences,” she indicates.
What affects the most is what happens closest. So you don’t miss anything, subscribe.
Subscribe
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits
_
#Prosecutors #Office #censures #Voxs #effort #extend #accusation #Mónica #Oltra