The judge of the Audiencia Nacional Manuel García Castellón confirms that leaves out the ‘case Villarejo’ the vice-president of the Government, Paul Churches , who was appearing in the matter as prejudiced and accused of having harmed the investigation. The leader of United we Can accuse the excomisario Police, imprisoned as a preventive measure since November of 2017, to have participated in the theft of the phone of your exasesora and have filtered to the media the content of conversations of Churches, stored in the device. Now the judge rejects the argument raised in an attempt to “political interference” on the part of the former Jose Manuel Villarejo.
After the declaration of Dina Bousselham lagoon , a consultant to Churches during his career as a euro mp, the instructor decided to check out Churches the condition of injured to the not fitting part of the statement, with the narrative offered in its day by the Churches. After the decision of the magistrate, the officer turned the file, a decision that the judge has confirmed in a new order issued today.
In the resolution, Garcia-Castellon argues that throughout the investigation there have appeared new data that they leave in evidence that condition of victim. In the first place, that Churches had in his possession the card of the phone Bousselham lagoon before creating the files found in the power of Jose Manuel Villarejo .
Churches before Villarejo
In this sense, the research, said the judge, proved that he received the card the 20 January 2016 and which have not been found in the possession of Villarejo devices with that information before April 14 of that year. However, Churches accuses the former to devise a plan to get the information of your advisor and filter it to the press to damage him politically.
As the second argument, the holder of the Central Court of Instruction 6 indicates that the vice-president of the Government hide your exasesora the possession of the memory card until months later. “Is inferred from what has happened that Churches, despite being knowledgeable of the contents of the card and theft of the same, did not return to Dina the card in, until after a time, with consequences for the elucidation of the facts investigated,” says the magistrate.
This behavior continues the instructor, manifests “incompatible” with the dimension that the appellant intended the theft of the card “and removes it completely from the argumentario sustained, with respect to the alleged political interference ”.
He hid Dinah
The judge considered it important to highlight the fact that Churches received the card from the hands of the president of the Group Zeta Antonio Asensio and not said anything to Dina “despite knowing that it contained personal information and intimate of its holder, and that, in addition, the card had been obtained unlawfully”. From the facts gathered it is evident that the magazine Interviú, of the editorial group, he had access to the card of the exasesora and publish your content told the Churches what had happened and gave it to them.
the judge García Castellón this passivity is inconsistent with the demonstrations made in court by Churches, and “confirm (again) that can’t be had for harmed in any case.”
The research, affected
In her car, the magistrate notes that the omission of Churches had influence on the investigation of the facts Bousselham was intended to shed light on the theft of your phone and the subsequent publication of some messages of your phone in the online journal Ok Daily.
finally, the resolution explains that the leader of we Can returned it to his exasesora the card of the mobile damaged , that included pictures of catches of interventions of the Churches into groups of instant messaging.
The magistrate says that it is unknown the reason why the Bousselham made these photographs, but it is established that when Churches agreed to the content of the card, on the 20th of January, you could see that these images were there as he himself acknowledged, admitting that he considered the device in a computer of the headquarters of the publishing group of Asensio.
in Addition, the judge explains that the Dina stated in court that Paul’s Churches knew what was on the inside of the card because he himself said so. “It is likely -concluded the judge – that this last point may be the key to understanding not only why Churches did not return the card to Bousselham, but the most important thing; the state in which it is returned”.
