The judge in the Villarejo case, Manuel García Castellón, has decided to lengthen what is known as the ‘Dina case’ and has denounced the complainant, Dina Bousselham, and her ex-partner, Roberto Sa Ferrerira, for false testimony before the Madrid courts. The instructor, who has been investigating the theft of the phone of Pablo Iglesias’s former adviser and the dissemination of its content for three years, understands that both Bousselham and his ex-partner have failed to tell the truth several times throughout the procedure in their statements and leaves a hypothetical accusation in the hands of the Madrid judges, competent to investigate this type of crime.
García Castellón anticipates his months prior to the elections: new investigation into Podemos
García Castellón makes this decision at the request of a popular accusation close to the PP, Pro Lege, which exercises the accusation in several cases against the central Executive and leftist formations. The deduction of the testimony of the magistrate of the National High Court goes in two directions: towards the courts of Plaza de Castilla in Madrid for, supposedly, being untrue in his statements in piece 10 of the Tándem case, but also to the courts of the town of Alcorcón for false reporting, supposedly, in the report of the theft of his phone, the content of which was disseminated by various media outlets. The Prosecutor’s Office considers that the main hypothesis is that the “Villarejo organization” was behind the leak.
The judge, who has already unsuccessfully tried to bring Pablo Iglesias before the Supreme Court for various crimes, echoes in his order the letter with which he tried to investigate the then Second Vice President of the Government, to justify his request for an investigation to Bousselham and Ferreira: “Coherently with the reasoning transcribed, embodied in the reasoned statement, the request” of Pro Lege must be granted, says the magistrate after reproducing his own reasoned statement over 20 pages.
In said reasoned statement, García Castellón alludes to Bousselham’s change of version regarding the state of the card when he received it from the hands of Pablo Iglesias, months after those responsible for Grupo Zeta had given it to him. At first, Iglesias’s former collaborator said that I can access it and then assured that she could not and that her boyfriend turned to a foreign company to recover her content.
The Prosecutor’s Office: its “vagueness” does not affect the case
Garcia Castellón adopts the decision to send the case to Plaza de Castilla against the criteria of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office. In a document to which elDiario.es has had access, the prosecutors of the Tándem case, Miguel Serrano and César Rivas, highlight the “vague contradictions (sic) of their versions of the facts”, referring to Bousselham and Sa Ferreira, but they add: “It cannot be considered that this has in any way altered the result of the investigation, since with the result of the expert report on the origin of the damage to the card it is unfeasible for the attribution to Pablo Iglesias Turrión of a crime of computer damage.
In addition, the prosecutors add, “it is highly foreseeable that both witnesses will have to testify in the oral trial about the same facts”, for which they remind García Castellón that the Criminal Procedure Law does not consider it appropriate to “proceed for a crime of false testimony against the aforementioned witnesses. In a tweet, the leader of Podemos Juanma del Olmo reacted to García Castellón’s decision wondering if “the judge is carrying out his work in a corrupt manner”.