The fourth section of the Provincial Court of Valencia has forced the investigating judge who saw no evidence of criminality against Mónica Oltra to send the leader of Compromís to trial for the alleged cover-up of her ex-husband’s sexual abuse of a minor under the guardianship of the Generalitat.
The order of the Valencia Court indicates that the instructor “cannot deny the accusations”, exercised by various brands of the extreme right, the opening of the oral trial “if there is a probability that the facts can be appreciated as subsumable in conduct” that is “reasonably” assessed as criminal.
The resolution, whose speaker was Judge Clara Bayarri, closes the limbo in which Oltra found herself, after the resistance of the investigating judge, Vicente Ríos, and the prosecutor, Jaime Cussac, to accuse the former vice president of the Generalitat and send her to the bench.
The fourth section, chaired by Judge Pedro Castellano, partially considers the appeals of the private prosecution and the popular ones (exercised by Vox and the association of the ultra agitator Cristina Seguí) against two orders of the investigating judge and her substitute that denied the opening of an oral trial.
The “wide range of evidence” of the accusations
“This court continues to appreciate, as was already explained to the Investigating Magistrate, that the facts to which this procedure is limited, with only the declaration itself verified by the latter, and without the need for further specifications of them due to the accusations, were and are subsumable in the typical and illegal acts, legally provided for as a crime, for which the case is accused,” indicates the order, to which this newspaper has had access.
The resolution considers that the facts are “indicative of constituting a crime”, thus meeting the required parameters that determine the necessary opening, by the investigating judge, of the oral trial, as it concludes.
The investigating judge has resisted against all odds to take Mónica Oltra to the dock when he saw no evidence of criminality. The magistrate even assured that “no one should be tried without there being a single rational indication of criminality against him.” The Court of Valencia, it warns in the order, “shares” that maxim “fully.”
On the other hand, the resolution states that the accusations “yes” (in bold) “support their claims, on a wide range of evidence that they detail in their writings, collecting explicit statements from witnesses and investigators that support their statements.”
The instructor, on the contrary, does not explain “the reasons for disregarding such indicative invocations exposed” in the appeals of the accusations, “limiting himself to dismissing them with the qualification of ‘conjectures or suspicions’”, adds the fourth section.
Source: www.eldiario.es
