the judgment on the Hearing of Pontevedra against the drug trafficker Jose Ramon Prado Bugallo, Sito Milñanco, has been this Friday deliberated in the midst of criticism from the defense lawyers by the lack of evidence of accusation. While the six lawyers have put in evidence the contradictions of the experts of Finance to deflate the arguments of the prosecutor, this has maintained the accusation for money laundering and the request for six years of his sentence for Miñanco, three family members and a builder, while admitting some errors in the expert evidence on the valuation of the equity valued at ten million euros. The lawyer of the narco has been accused by the public prosecutor's office of wanting to "condemn the myth" with a "script show", in allusion to the series Fariña.
MORE INFORMATIONThe pricing of the Treasury on the property of Sito Miñanco stranded the trial for laundering Sito Miñanco asks the Supreme to review your first conviction of 1993, The fortune hidden Sito Miñanco
After rectifying the faults in the heritage valuation of the report of the Treasury, the attorney, Jesus Streets, has made a review of the history of the famous smuggler and drug trafficker-and galician in order to sustain his accusation. Considers that Miñanco has laundered money from 1988, the year which dates back to the research on the purchase of a plot in Cambados (Pontevedra), where he subsequently built a shipyard which have always been linked. “If this is so, we are faced with a case prototype of bleaching”, has sentenced the prosecutor to refer to the stay of the defendant in Panama, a historic tax haven, and its relationship with the colombian cartels of the cocaine.
In her extensive story, Streets, has insisted on the difficulty of obtaining a direct proof of the crime of money laundering and has recognized that there is only evidence that Miñanco injected money into the parent company of the family, the real estate Betexper San Saturnino. “The test indiciaria is sufficient to show that around this company had a community of interests of the family,” he said.
On the ex-wife of Prado Bugallo the prosecutor argues that despite the separation of the marriage, the relationship has never been cut. And as for the bats, who inherited her daughter, has ensured that this well was not his grandmother but his father, a statement that it has on the accused in the dock. The president of the court has been forced to make a call of attention to warn that the expel of the room if they returned to repeat the gestures of disapproval towards the prosecutor.
The implication that the mother of Sito Miñanco would have been a figurehead of his son in the purchase of the punt focused the final allegation of the media narco gallego. “To point out to mr. prosecutor, because I would not stay in peace, that the bat purchased by my father and when he died became of my mother, so it takes the last name Prado”, has been clarified.
His lawyer, Gonzalo Boye, has branded sexist comments of the prosecutor, “because it has been taken for granted that a woman could not hold the reins of a company”, has been put forward, and has criticized the lack of evidence. “Still don't know what I have to defend my client,” he recriminat Boye, who has been quoted to even the series Fariña. “We're in a parallel reality, a television script that the prosecutor has not wanted to alter, therefore she has not reviewed evidence that we have presented.”
The defender of Miñanco countered the arguments of the prosecutor and recalled that in 1988, there was no offence of laundering. “But we must condemn the myth", has criticized Boye. "The lord Prado, although it is not an example of life, has some fundamental rights and for this system to work it is necessary to guarantee them”. According to the lawyer, "there is nothing that proves" that Prado Bugallo has laundered money and the prosecution asks the court for "an act of faith to condemn him": "Not to have been concerned to go beyond the script because there are who condemn this man and put him in this cause to dirty the record".