Sunday, May 22

Justice rejects the complaint against Rocío Monasterio because her falsified seal was “so crude” that she does not see documentary falsity

The Superior Court of Justice of Madrid has dismissed for processing the complaint filed by the Prosecutor’s Office against the Vox deputy Rocío Monasterio “because the facts related to the crime of documentary falsification attributed to the defendant did not meet.” The judges affirm that the inclusion of a falsified stamp in documentation that the deputy presented to the Madrid City Council is “so crude and perceptible to the naked eye” that it does not allow to mislead, which is one of the requirements of this criminal type.

Monastery defends its innocence before the complaint of the Prosecutor’s Office: “A copy is not a forgery”

Know more

The prosecution he maintained in his complaint that Monastery used a falsified stamp of the Madrid Surveyors Association – as reported by the entity itself in February 2020 – in projects it presented to the Madrid City Council in 2011 and 2016 for the loft of the presenter Arturo Valls. The last, therefore, three years before she became a regional deputy. According to the Public Ministry, Monastery presented a black and white photocopy of the visa stamp of a first project in that same building in 2005, instead of the mandatory visa stamps that each new project requires, “with the intention of giving the plans the appearance of being duly visas, a fraudulent use ”, which constituted, in his opinion, a crime of falsification in a public document.

However, the magistrates of the Civil and Criminal Chamber maintain in their resolution, before which there is an appeal, that for there to be material falsehood “it is a nuclear requirement that the alteration of the truth has a considerable minimum of appearance, a sufficient entity that is capable of misleading ”. For the magistrates, in this case it is a gross or rude falsehood, which precisely for this reason deprives the material support of any possibility of producing a legal effect.

The judges affirm that the introduction of a graphic reproduction of a visa issued by the Surveyors Association of the year 2005 – corresponding to a project rejected by the Madrid City Council – in plans of a later “corrected” project is “so crude and perceptible with the naked eye without the need for expertise, which is incapable of misleading any person in general about the authenticity, much less technicians from the urban development department who would have to validate it “, so, in his opinion,” could not in any way supply effect as authentic and due endorsement ”.

“It is difficult to understand,” conclude the magistrates, “in view of the obvious inappropriateness of the stamping of the image of the visa, what claim could have been who carried out this operation, but the truth is that, from a criminal point of view, For the purposes of considering the facts in relation to the crime of falsity, the crudeness of the procedure does not allow to affirm the criminal nature of the facts. It is not conceivable that the photocopied and poor quality insertion of the 2005 visa in the plans that are provided in 2016 could generate any appearance of authenticity ”.