The extesorero the PP Luis Barcenas, who was sentenced to 33 years in prison in the central plot of the case Gürtel corruption —the so-called Era— I, has presented this Tuesday in the Supreme Court an appeal in cassation against that judgment. In his writing, the former responsible for the finances of the formation of the conservative attributed to his predecessor in the position, Álvaro Lapuerta, who passed away on June 2 at the age of 90, the responsibility of “the management of all the funds of the party, including the accounting parallel —the so-called b-box— in up to collect donations opaque to the treasury of great entrepreneurs, mainly in the sector of the public work.
MORE INFORMATIONThe statement questioning the “credibility” of the testimony of Rajoy The prosecutor's office asks to impute to Francisco Camps as a part of the ‘Gürtel’ Interior located evidence of the diversion of funds reserved for spying on Barcenas
In his writing, 565 pages, the attorney Barcenas, Joaquin Ruiz de Infante, raises a battery of 24 reasons that it intends to void the sentence or getting a reduced penalty, that includes a fine of € 88 million. The extesorero insists on an idea already pointed out both in the trial as in the pretrial phase of the case: he was “a mere amanuensis” of that “accounting extracontable” and its work was limited to record income and payments, which are then concretely sought to protect Lapuerta.
Barcenas is reminded of the statements in the trial of the case Gürtel, which was held over a hundred sessions between October 2016 and November 2017, both the ex-president of the Government, Mariano Rajoy, as the former secretaries-general Javier Arenas, Ángel Acebes, Jaime mayor Oreja and Francisco Álvarez-Cascos and former vice president of Government Rodrigo Rato. All of them, says Barcenas “recognized without any doubt that the entire responsibility in economic matters and finance corresponded to the national treasurer Alvaro Lapuerta”, which Pashacasino gave way to Barcenas, the witness to the front of the treasury in 2008 after the Congress of the PP, celebrated in Valencia. The popular leaders agreed, remember the writing, in which the role of Luis Barcenas, as a manager, was “subordinate” Lapuerta, “in direct dependence on the same and exclusively on tasks of an administrative and logistical”.
The defense of Barcenas rejects the tort of misappropriation of 149,600 euros of the box b, for the purchase of shares of Liberty Digital, a crime for which he has been convicted as a collaborator needed his wife, Rosalía Iglesias. And remember that the PP, the only one who could be considered harmed by this appropriation, “at no time has revealed and has proceeded to claim the above amounts”.
The b-box of the PP will be in the next few months the subject of a trial in the National court. The caso Gürtel had proven the existence of such a accounting parallel and the reality of the notes accounting included in it. The defense believes that the sentence exceeds the facts for which he was prosecuted Barcenas and implies a “double prosecution.” And responsible to the judge José Ricardo de Prada. The writing considers that the presence at the court trial of this judge, as a progressive, which was challenged without success by his friendship with the first investigating judge in the case, Baltasar Garzón, has affected his right to a fair trial.
The writing insists on the idea that the bank documents of Barcenas provided by the swiss authorities should not be used to convict him for tax crimes and ask for that test to be cancelled. It is also considered that have not been duly evaluated the evidence of disclaimer made by the defence and that the sentence “does not follow a discourse, ordered and structured in a coherent way,” but that follows the structure of the indictment of the Prosecutor's office. This, says the writing becomes “difficult and convoluted” the mission of establishing a thread rational between the proven facts and their legal qualification, and has led, they claim, to “qualify the same set of facts in different ways, to achieve a penalty is extraordinary.”