The Court of Instruction number 5 of Tarragona investigates the main person convicted of the so-called ‘Crime of the Urban Police’, Rosa Peral, and her father, Francisco Peral, for a crime of taking property. They were denounced by the family of the victim of the Urban Police crime, Pedro R., considering that before the sentence for this murder was final, Peral transferred half of his home in Vilanova i la Geltrú to his father so as not to have to pay the compensation imposed in the sentence.
In his statement, Peral He has assured that since he could not meet the mortgage payments on his home, he gave it to his father. and has denied that making this transaction would serve to avoid paying the moneye compensation to the victim’s family. The crime was committed in this house on the night of May 1, 2017, although Pedro R.’s body was found in a burned-out car in the Foix reservoir.
In addition to the prison sentence, the Barcelona Court sentenced Peral, and also her lover Albert López, to jointly compensate the victim’s family with 885,000 euros. The sentence established that, if they did not have the money, their properties would be seized. The prosecution believes that Peral allegedly transferred part of his assets to his mother days before his final conviction for murder to avoid compensating Pedro R.’s family.
Related news
Before the Supreme Court confirmed this resolution, which maintained the 25 years in prison for Peral and 20 for López, for the crime of murder, The convicted woman gave half of her home in Vilanova i la Geltrú to her father. The other half corresponded to Peral’s ex-husband. The victim’s family intends to obtain around 50,000 euros in this judicial claim, half of the property in the name of the former Urban Police agent, since the rest is seized.
Peral and his father only responded to questions from their lawyer, Núria González, and stressed that the transfer of the property was to avoid the seizure, because the mortgage was still being paid. The two met in the hallways of the judicial building and the statement lasted only about 30 minutes each. ANDThe court has urged the parties not to make statements to avoid leaks. Now, you must decide what procedures you require to continue with the investigation.