As La Vanguardia reported exclusively a few hours ago, the investigating court 34 of Madrid has agreed in an order dated April 14 to open an oral trial for a crime of Injury made with publicity after the complaint filed by the defense of Antonio David Flores against MarÃa Patiño.
The legal process refers to the statements of the journalist in the Socialité program and where she pointed out, among other information, that the former civil guard was responsible for hanging the posters where they accused him of being an abuser, and that he had seen images that corroborated it. .
As we reported this Wednesday, in the order to which this medium has had access, the investigating judge, upon agreeing to the opening of the oral trial, establishes as a precautionary measure the provision of a bond of 120,000 euros (amount requested by Antonio David Flores by way of compensation for damages) granting the defendant, that is, Maria Patiño, a period of 1 day from when she is personally notified to make such provision under penalty of seizure of her assets in sufficient quantity to secure the indicated amount.
Despite the fact that all the information published comes from this official document, MarÃa Patiño reacted on her social networks, assuring that the news published by La Vanguardia was “false”, raising a debate on social networks about its veracity. That is why from this medium we have decided to publish in the form of a capture the most significant part of the court order where explicit reference is made to all the information that was disclosed in order to end possible speculation.
In the same vein, the presenter’s lawyer, Ricardo Ibáñez, intervened this Wednesday night exclusively on a YouTube channel to explain this matter, and in the audio that the lawyer sent confirms that the information from that there will be a trial for libel and the reliable amount that we publish in La Vanguardia, although it makes some nuances that are not dealt with in the aforementioned article.
“That a person files a complaint for injuries against MarÃa Patiño does not mean that it will prosper,” the lawyer begins by recounting something that is obvious. “He can ask for 120,000 euros, but this does not mean that the judge is going to give it to him,” he continues. At no time in the article is it ensured that this is an amount that she has to pay Antonio David, but rather that it is a security provision as a precautionary measure.
Finally, Ibáñez ends with this reflection: “For a person to say that they believe that he or someone close to him has been able to put up those posters is not an insult, it is an opinion or a criticism that a lot of people think. The only thing that MarÃa did was tell the position of many peopleâ€, thus entering into an assessment of the merits of the trial in which the article does not enter because it is already the work of justice.
In fact, the presenter’s lawyer ends with this reflection: “In the trial it will be shown that there has not been any type of insult or slander, it does not make any sense.” A subjective opinion on the outcome of the events that is not discussed at any time in the aforementioned exclusive.
From La Vanguardia it is maintained that our only function is to report some legal facts that are newsworthy and that the only thing that was done in that piece, having in our possession the pertinent judicial order, was to detail at what moment this legal process is revealing some of the details that now appear to have been called into question. In a direct for his YouTube channel, Antonio David himself together with his lawyer Iván Hernández admitted that everything published in this medium coincided with the car that they also have in their possession as an implicated party.
