The Prosecutor’s Office has asked the Badajoz judge investigating David Sánchez, brother of the President of the Government, to specify the “specific facts” for which he has been charged and called to testify next January. The representative of the Public Ministry understands that the instructor is limited to making a “non-detailed referral” to the Civil Guard report on the case and, according to her criteria, she must repeat the case but specifying what facts and crimes she attributes to each investigated person, among others. They are also the general secretary of the Extremaduran socialists.
The magistrate decided, after several months of investigating David Sánchez following a complaint from Clean Hands, to call the brother of the President of the Government to testify. A complaint that mixed various press reports and some hoaxes to accuse David Sánchez of having received favored treatment upon his appointment in 2017 as head of the Performing Arts Office of the Badajoz Provincial Council, also for being paid without going to work and, finally, for a suspicious enrichment of more than 1.4 million euros.
The report from the Central Operational Unit of the Civil Guard recently contributed to the proceedings explains, first of all, that this supposed fortune of Pedro Sánchez’s younger brother does not respond to reality, but rather to an erroneous calculation made by a media outlet. The judge has requested information from BBVA to know the details of the shares that David Sánchez supposedly had in the bank.
The bulk of the report is dedicated to analyzing thousands of emails intercepted in successive searches in the Badajoz Provincial Council. Emails in which various officials of the organization discussed the creation of a new senior position to coordinate its two music conservatories. Without reaching any clear conclusion in this regard, the Civil Guard stressed that it was not a priority to create this position and that part of the process was done in a short space of time.
The judge’s order calling David Sánchez and Miguel Ángel Gallardo, general secretary of the PSOE in Extremadura, to testify, explained that they should be called to appear as defendants to preserve the right of defense. Now the Prosecutor’s Office understands that that order did not specify which facts it attributes to each one.
The nine summoned to testify, he explains, have the right to know “the facts attributed to them” and there must be “a verisimilitude judgment regarding the criminal appearance of the facts reported at the time,” not a simple reference to the UCO report. . It is not necessary to “reason everything,” he concedes, but “a minimum of indicative attribution of some relevant facts is necessary.”
In the case there is no, the prosecutor reproaches, “a singling out of behaviors with criminal significance for each of those investigated, which we consider essential for their defense.” The magistrate, in her order, “does not make any presentation of the existing evidence against each of the people from whom it is intended to take statements as investigated; “The specific crimes for which each of them are being investigated are not even indicated.”
#Prosecutors #Office #appeals #accusation #Sánchezs #brother #asks #judge #specific #facts #attributed
