The National Court has confirmed the prosecution of businessman Javier López Madrid for the Harassment of Dr. María Elisa Pinto with which the former director of OHL had a private conflict, which leads the procedure to oral proceedings.
The Criminal Chamber has issued an order, to which Efe has had access, in which it rejects López Madrid’s appeal against the order of the head of the Central Court number 6 of the Court, Manuel Garcia Castellonwho agreed to his prosecution for active bribery, as also to former commissioner Jose Manuel Villarejo and his partner Rafael Redondo, although in his case for passive bribery.
The defense of the dermatologist Elisa Pinto asks for six years in prison for López Madrid for allegedly hire Villarejo, for whom he also requests another six years in prisonwhen he was still active in the Police to harass the doctor.
This piece of the Villarejo case is instructed outside the procedure that has been investigated by the investigating court number 39 of the capital, where López Madrid and José Villarejo are prosecuted for the alleged crimes of harassment, threats and injuries towards Pinto, who asks for 22 years in prison for them.
In addition, there is a third procedure in the Investigating Court number 26 of the capital in which López Madrid asks to prosecute Pinto for harassment and she requests the file.
In his appeal, the businessman’s lawyer asked the Chamber “to dismiss and file the proceedings with respect to Javier López Madrid, as there was no conduct deserving of criminal reproach in regard to him or evidence of criminality” since “there was no made an offer or delivery of a gift, promise or compensation in favor of Villarejo, which is why there is no evidence whatsoever”.
Y, in the alternative, requested to revoke the indictment and continue the investigation by collecting full testimony of the proceedings of Court number 26 of Madrid.
But the Chamber emphasizes that there are “indications of the possible commission of a crime”, so the magistrate’s decision to prosecute those under investigation “is correct and correct”.
“What an investigated party cannot successfully seek is to impose the dismissal or continuation of the investigation phase, through the practice of new investigative procedures, to the instructor, against his criteria,” he adds.
In addition, the Chamber endorses García Castellón’s opinion that “this Court does not investigate the alleged harassment experienced by María Elisa Pinto, but rather the facts under investigation are limited to the existence of a crime of bribery (…) existence of indications of contracting the services of a commissioner of the National Police Corps in active service at the time of the occurrence of the events.”