The defense of the former Conssllera Salome Pradas expanded the complaint about the judge of the instructor Dana, who was presented on May 14 before the General Council of the Judicial Government (CGPJ). The investigation lawyer, Eduardo de Urbano, asks the government body of judges to suspend the magistrate -instructor, Nuria Ruis Tobarra, and that the “legal substitute” is responsible for indicating the procedure.
A brief description to which this newspaper had access that the request of the magistrate, so that numerous accusations were made on their grouping on this case, was transformed by an instructor into the “expected judgment on the fault” of the former Conmesellera, who investigated in the case with the former emergency department Emilio Argyuz. Protection Pradas recalls that the judge provided the parties with an “excessive and 15 -day“ for a 15 -day ”period that was supposed to be announced. And, in addition, in the car on June 23, the instructor summoned private and popular accusations that on three working days they express whether there are “indications of criminal liability for extinction and retained injuries” against two investigations in the procedure.
According to lawyer Eduardo de Urbano, the decisions of the magistrate to the request of the charges are justified for the “founded reasons” of procedural dexterity. The defense believes that in order to solve the problem of the accusations, the magistrate chose the “excessive and harmful procedure of the right” presumption of the innocence of the salomers, after the “wide period” provided to the parties has expired in order to position themselves on the unification of parties controlled by lawyers of the first and supported.
“Unusual phenomenon”
A brief presentation emphasizes that “numerous accusations” opposed an “unusual phenomenon”. Protection Pradas claims that the magistrate has turned the “simple procedural frequency” into a “expected decision on wine” at the stage at which “numerous” learning procedures are expected.
A complaint to the CGPJ Tilda “Free Edema” The decision of the judge “with its inevitable remark of the media”. The Pradas lawyer attacks the magistrate Nuria Ruiz Tobarra and accuses her of conducting instructions with an “unfair and unacceptable regime”.
On the other hand, the expansion of the complaint also states that the judge “refuses to satisfy” the request for the protection of Pradas on the correction of errors, which, in her opinion, contains the act of its application, as is investigated on April 11. The magistrate asked for the defense of Pradas to understand what sides they considered incorrectly deciphered.
When an expansion of a complaint to CGPJ, the lawyer regrets that the declaration of almost three hours of Pradas “goes in the rigid synthesis of ten folio”, which do not consider the questions asked, “many of the certain complexity and expansion”. It also guarantees that the declaration act does not allow “becoming a complete idea of what is really announced” by Salome Pradas.
Link to clean hands, offensive against the judge
The letter also recalls that the “other part” of the reason filed a “complaint” for the alleged crime regarding distribution against the magistrate. These are pure hands, the essence that was excluded from the incompatibility procedure between its justification as a popular charges of the procedure and protecting the investigated by Emilio Arguzu by lawyer Jose Maria Bueno Mansanares, who previously defined as the “boss” in the services of Pseudindato.
Pure hands used as evidence for its occurrence against the magistrate. Pruning the press, denied by both the prosecutor’s office and the association of judges, as reported in this newspaper. In addition, Pseudosindicato, led by Miguel Bernad, registered a complaint, despite the fact that the organic law of the judiciary requires a complaint in order to be able to pursue the alleged criminal liability against judges and magistrates.
The Pradas complaint ends, repeating the request that “the judge of the instructor is suspended” – “for the reasons for prudence and, given the seriousness of the facts” – and that it is replaced by its “legal replacement”. “Do not do this, a possible invalidity of actions can have very serious consequences,” concludes a letter.
