García Castellón sends López Madrid to the bench for having hired Villarejo to harass Dr. Pinto

The decision of the judge in the Villarejo case comes after the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office had requested the file of piece 24, relating to the hiring of Villarejo and his partner by López Madrid, which García Castellón rejects. Anticorruption had initially promoted the piece by understanding that the hiring of the active official should be part of the Villarejo case, regardless of the fact that two Madrid courts were investigating the situation of harassment that the doctor and López Madrid reproached each other for.

In a letter from the prosecutors, to which he has had access elDiario.es, César Rivas and Miguel Serrano argue that once the investigation has been carried out “there are not enough indications of its commission with sufficient solidity and forcefulness to formulate an indictment.” Prosecutors argue that the indication of payment, which is what they have limited themselves to investigating, consists of an imprecise entry in Villarejo’s diaries of September 4, 2013 – “delivers 10 on account” – and that this is contradicted by a much later recording, from January 26, 2017, in which the commissioner expresses his intention to claim a payment from the businessman.

At a meal for Villarejo and his wife, Gemma Alcalá, with the married couple Ana Rosa Quintana and Juan Muñoz, the policeman says: “When everything is over (…) I will talk to Javierito: give me a little pasta because you have put me in in an envolao and you haven’t even called me to say sorry (…) I’m going to put damages “.

Prosecutors add that there is no trace of payments from López Madrid to Villarejo or to the company through which he managed the orders he received, Cenyt. There is also no trace of another note from September 10, 2013 in which Villarejo wrote in his diary: “BIG would meet Madrid today. 211,000 euros/year”, with BIG also being the curator Enrique García Castaño.

López Madrid’s relationship with Villarejo, García Castaño and other police commanders must be resolved, says Anticorruption, in the cases of the Madrid courts. In this regard, it should be noted that Court number 39 opened an oral trial last October against Villarejo and Villar Mir’s son-in-law for threats, harassment and injuries to Dr. Pinto. On the other hand, the court that kept the woman charged after a complaint by López Madrid filed the case against Pinto last November.

By rejecting the Anti-Corruption claim, Judge García Castellón recovers what he considers facts accredited indictment in piece 24 and that for the private prosecution, which the doctor exercises, are constitutive of the aforementioned crimes of bribery. Therefore, he requests six years in prison for Villarejo and López Madrid, and four for Rafael Redondo.

García Castellón collects in his car: “José Manuel Villarejo used police means to discredit María Elisa: he followed up, accessed her private information without authorization and tried to interfere in the police investigation, requesting information on the status of the investigations, manipulating the investigation police and making forecasts about the result of a line-up of which he would have to be a part”. The judge also recovers the aforementioned recordings and annotations, as well as the telephone contacts with Villarejo found on López Madrid’s telephone.

The judge’s order once again insists on the actions of the current commissioner of the Madrid Centro district, Alberto Carba, in charge of investigating Dr. Pinto by order of the Police Directorate at the time of the PP political brigade and who, picks up the magistrate, “sent several emails to Javier López Madrid informing him of the status of the investigation and receiving instructions.” As elDiario.es revealed, the policeman wrote to the powerful businessman López Madrid, revealing information from the investigation and encouraging him with expressions such as “we are going to win this game.” Carba is not charged, although the Madrid judge who filed the case against Pinto in November assured that the investigation “casts doubt” on the reports made by this commissioner when he participated in the case.