The Scientific Police has concluded in a report sent to the judge investigating the Villarejo case at the National High Court that the “damage” to the card of Dina Bousselham, a former collaborator of Pablo Iglesias in the European Parliament, was caused by a type of “sanding” which corresponds to the techniques performed by “laboratories specialized in information retrieval from this type of device.” That is, they are compatible with the manipulation of the device by the Welsh technology company that the Bousselham couple resorted to to try to recover its content after Iglesias gave it to them and who already reported that it had arrived at their facilities. “physically intact”.
The judge turns a piece of the case against Villarejo into the ‘Pablo Iglesias case’
This new expert report, advanced by The Spanish and to which elDiario.es has had access, therefore removes the suspicions about Iglesias as the cause of the damage, as the judge in the case, Manuel García Castellón, was investigating. The magistrate had established as a priority to resolve what the politician did with the mobile card of his former collaborator or a copy, regardless of whether Villarejo kept another and three media published part of its content, according to an Internal Affairs report.
The magistrate has attributed two possible crimes to Iglesias – disclosure of secrets and / or computer damage – for the unjustified retention of the mobile content for at least six months and the alleged damage to the device, which is now questioned by the expert report, dated on August 12. The Scientific Police document indicates that it is not possible to access the files because the card presents a “discontinuity” in the connection points of the interface produced by an “excess” of “sanding the protective cover”, a technique that correspond to those used by companies specialized in recovering the content of this type of device.
It concludes, consequently, that “since the memory content cannot be read, it cannot be determined whether there were damages prior to the discontinuity found in the vestige, which parts are affected by them, or the moment in which they occurred.” .
A previous report from the Scientific Police claimed that the card was “partially burned” when Bousselham handed it over to the court, which led the judge to ask the Welsh company to clarify “the state” in which it received the device. The firm Field Associates confirmed that a user sent him a device whose data was not accessible, but that it had no external damage. It was then that the judge commissioned this other expert report, dated August 12, which has determined that the damage to the card is compatible with the “sanding” carried out by the Welsh company.
The origin of the case
All these investigations correspond to the piece baptized as Dina, a smaller appendix of the more than thirty that make up the Villarejo case when compared to those investigating the commissioner commission by BBVA or its participation in the espionage of the ex-treasurer of the PP Luis Bárcenas.
The case stems from the discovery by investigators in a 2018 search at Villarejo’s home of a copy of the contents of the cell phone that Bousselham had reported stolen three years earlier. In March 2019 the judge offered Bousselham and Iglesias to appear as injured parties, since several media outlets had published information that affected Podemos and its leader from the content of that card.
In that statement, Iglesias told the judge that the content of the card had been provided to him by those responsible for Interviú magazine in January 2019 and that it, original or copy, he kept for a time until he gave it to Bousselham. In his statement that same day, Bousselham told the judge that when he received the card from Iglesias, the device was damaged. However, fifteen months and a new police report had to pass for the Prosecutor’s Office to propose to the magistrate to take a statement from Bousselham in the face of suspicions about his testimony and that of Iglesias. She acknowledged that she had made screenshots of published chats, which helped Anti-Corruption and the judge to conclude that then, Commissioner Villarejo did not have to be exclusively the source of the leak to the media.
As a result, the Prosecutor’s Office proposed to withdraw the condition of injured party to Iglesias, suspected of a crime of revealing secrets and another of computer damage, for having kept information that belonged to Bousselham for at least six months. In its report, the Prosecutor’s Office also warned the judge that it was not possible to act against Iglesias because Bousselham had not shown any sign of wanting to accuse him, an essential requirement to exercise criminal action in the two crimes that he could have committed incidentally.
Anti-corruption then proposed to subpoena Bousselham again to clarify his intentions, but the judge ignored it, withdrew the condition of injured to Iglesias and unleashed an investigation that included an international order to the Welsh company. In between, Bousselham changed his version and informed the judge in writing that the card did work when Iglesias gave it to him, implying that it could be her or someone close to her who harmed her.
After this new report, the investigating magistrate will have to decide whether to continue carrying out proceedings, stop his investigation on Iglesias or, as a measurer who is the second vice president before the Supreme Court, raise a reasoned statement against him because he has gathered sufficient evidence to request his indictment before the High Court. Next September 2 García Castellón has called José Manuel Calvente to testify as a witness, former lawyer of Podemos and promoter of the complaint that has led to the accusation of part of the party’s leadership for alleged illegal financing in a Madrid court.
García Castellón quoted him after it was published in El Confidencial and El Mundo as part of a conversation between Podemos lawyers in which it was revealed that Calvente questioned the legal strategy undertaken by the party as a result of the opening of this piece at the Hearing National. In a message posted on his Twitter account, he described the ‘Dina case as a’ hoax ‘.