The PSOE and Más Madrid ask to postpone the statement of Ayuso’s partner so that new crimes can be investigated

The popular accusations exercised by the PSOE and Más Madrid have requested the postponement of the statement as an investigator of Alberto González Amador, Isabel Díaz Ayuso’s partner, scheduled for this morning, legal sources have informed elDiario.es. Through a document presented to the court, these accusations request that more proceedings be carried out because there are indications that the businessman could have committed more crimes, apart from the two of tax fraud and one of falsification of documents for which he is currently listed. as accused.

González Amador was summoned again this Monday before the court investigating him at 10:00 a.m. for tax fraud of more than 350,000 euros after getting rich in the pandemic by selling masks. The writing of the PSOE and Más Madrid has been registered at 9:00 a.m. and the decision that the investigating magistrate, Inmaculada Iglesias, will adopt is still unknown.

The same sources explain that it was not until June 12 that the accusations were able to access the documentation in the case, and that it includes the evidence against González Amador, especially the report from the Tax Agency. This has prevented them, they continue, from studying the case in detail.

It is the second time that the commission agent must go to court after the first appearance, on May 20, was suspended. That day he remained hidden in the facilities for three hours and put on a wig to try to mislead the journalists.

The popular prosecution considers that there are indications that the aggravated type of crimes against public finances can be applied in the case of González Amador due to the existence of an organization and the use of “an entire accounting engineering, through the use of legal entities or physical persons, some of them located abroad, to commit the crimes.”

The document presented by PSOE and Más Madrid also points out the possible existence of unfair administration, accounting falsehood, corruption in business and accounting crime. The aforementioned document includes the existence of “elements that allow us to suspect that the facts, in relation to the object of the documentary falsifications and tax fraud, affect more accounting elements than those initially indicated, which would affect the amount defrauded and those responsible. of the facts.”