The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Madrid accepted not admit the complaint to treatment filed by journalist Máximo Pradera against judge Juan Carlos Peinado, instructor of the trial in which Begoña Gómez, wife of the president of the government, is under investigation for alleged crimes of influence peddling and corruption around the world business.
In a resolution presented by Judge Francisco José Goyena – the same one who presented to the Supreme Court an exhibition against the Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, for a complaint for revealing the secrets of the boyfriend of Isabel Díaz Ayuso, President of the Community of Madrid -, the TSJM refuses to open criminal proceedings against Peinado for an alleged crime of prevarication.
The complaint concerned the fact that Peinado, although he decreed the secrecy of the trial against Begoña Gómez, transferred to the popular accusation exercised by Vox the statements of the first witnesses in the case.
This decision “does not contradict or violate the secrecy of the procedure decreed because they maintain said procedural situation, although occasionally modified to establish a situation of partial secrecy of the procedure, from the beginning, with
concerning the defense and, subsequently, for the purposes of the transfer of the
tripartite actions and respect the principle of equality of arms,
avoiding their helplessness”, affirms the TSJM.
He refers to the fact that Peinado allowed the defense to witness the testimonies and then, after the appearance of Vox in the case, he transferred these testimonies to the popular prosecution in compliance with the principle of equality of weapons, a decision that the instructor “reasonably justifies” even if it was made by court order rather than in a car.
The room reject the comparison of the complainant between this affair and the revelation of secrets reported by Díaz Ayuso’s boyfriend.
“We are not witnessing any hypotheses or comparable figures at all, even if they now seem to relate to the generally confidential nature of criminal procedures,” indicates the TSJM, which adds that “the arguments of the complaint are more very rare in this respect.” And “trying to force what was said by
this court in this case and everything that is happening in what concerns us now.”
“THE conceptual confusion that helps the complainant is patent”, affirm the magistrates, who explain that in the case of Alberto González Amador the TSJM underlined “the evaluation of the damage caused to a party with the dissemination of specific contents of the actions until then secret”, since the data of the investigation against him for alleged tax crimes and his desire to reach an agreement with the prosecution were broadcast in the media, an agreement which implied taking charge of the crimes.
“None of this is happening at the moment,” concludes the TSJM.
Two other complaints
This was the first – and weakest – complaint filed against Peinado. The Superior Court of Madrid has yet to rule on whether or not to admit the request for processing. criminal action promoted by the president of the governmentPedro Sánchez, against the judge who is investigating his wife.
This complaint, filed by the State Public Prosecutor’s Office on behalf of the head of executive, is based on the fact that Peinado, seeking the “extra-procedural goal” of harming the government, went to Moncloa to collect a deposition in person instead of doing so. in writing, as, in the complainant’s opinion, the law indicates.
Madrid Attorney General Almudena Lastra asked the court to admit this pending complaint and open a case against Peinado for alleged prevarication.
The most armed complaint is the one filed by the defense of Begoña Gómez, on which the superior prosecutor has not yet reported.
