Judge José Castro, the instructor of the ‘Nóos case’ that ended up taking Iñaki Urdangarin to jail, closes the Sumar list in the Balearic Islands. Podemos offered him in his day to lead the candidacy for Congress, but the judge rejected it and, in his place, Juan Pedro Yllanes occupied the first place, a judge who should have corresponded precisely to judge the case of the infanta and Urdangarin after the work of instruction that Castro did.
Sumar’s list on the islands is headed by Vicenç Vidal, representative of Més, a party that runs in coalition with Yolanda Díaz’s platform. Més has not been integrated into Sumar, but they are allied. Number two on the list is for an independent. Elizabeth Ripoll, close to Izquierda Unida and the first representative of Podemos appears in fourth place. The formation now has two deputies in Congress.
The incorporation of Castro in the Sumar lists has been a direct incorporation of Yolanda Díaz in which the party that leads the list has not intervened. Castro, already retired, is a judge widely known for his investigation of the ‘Noos case’, which came to seat the Infanta Cristina on the bench due to suspicions that she may have participated in the lucrative activities of her then-husband, Inaki Urdangarin.
The Nóos case investigated the aid from the public administrations of the Balearic Islands to the Nóos Institute directed by Iñaki Urdangarín and Diego Torres. The investigations ended in a trial in which the ex-husband of the infanta was sentenced to 5 years and 10 months in prison for the crimes of continued prevarication and embezzlement (both in competition), influence peddling, fraud against the Administration and two tax offenses. .
The Supreme Court reduced by 5 months compared to the 6 years and 3 months that the Court of Mallorca imposed on him because he was acquitted of the continued crime of falsifying a public document committed by an official, a crime that Diego Torres is also annulled, for understanding the Chamber that in the proven facts of the sentence, neither of them is attributed a contribution to those falsehoods.
The Supreme Court confirmed the responsibility of participants for profit of Ana María Tejeiro and Cristina de Borbón for the crimes of embezzlement of public funds and fraud against the Administration committed by their spouses. However, it partly upheld the appeal of Ana María Tejeiro in relation to her statement of liability as a profiteering participant in her husband’s tax crime, which by extension also applies to Cristina de Borbón with respect to the two tax crimes committed by her husband, arguing that participation for profit in crimes of tax fraud is not possible
