Ayuso's imputed collaborator resists the Civil Guard knowing her statement in court

Ayuso's imputed collaborator resists the Civil Guard knowing her statement in court

The Deputy Secretary for Territorial Organization of the Madrid Popular Party and Mayor of Arroyomolinos, Ana Millan, has appealed the decision of the judge investigating him in a case of alleged corruption regarding transferring to the Civil Guard the statement he gave as investigated in court. Ana Millán had refused to testify before the agents of the Central Operational Unit (UCO) who summoned her for the possible crimes of bribery, prevarication, fraud against the administration and money laundering.

However, before Judge José Luis García Marfil, Millán answered the questions of the investigating magistrate and the popular accusation of the PSOE. The Prosecutor's Office did not appear and the mayor refused to answer the lawyer from Más Madrid. From that statement arose the need to call Millán's partner as a witness.

Tracking the income of the mayor from a successful businessman of the Department that she directed in the past, the agents found 52,950 euros deposited in cash in her bank account between 2008 and 2017. She explained that her husband is dedicated to the hospitality industry and to the "world of the night", which gave her amounts for common expenses and that she, who does not like having money at home, deposited it in the bank.

In four years, between January 3, 2008 and July 13, 2012, and while she was Councilor for Youth, Ana Belén Millán received 44,462.67 euros from the Neverland company, owned by Vicente Rosellóas stated in the reports of the Civil Guard delivered to the judge, to which he has had access elDiario.es.

Four companies from Roselló were awarded, between 2006 and 2011, more than 660,915.21 euros in contracts from the Department of Youth, according to data that the UCO obtained from the Treasury. When Millán changed his Department, the Arroyomolinos City Council stopped hiring Roselló, according to the Civil Guard. In addition, Millán received another 6,642 euros from Roselló in 2012, the reason for which is unknown.

The mayor defended before Judge García Marfil that Roselló's income responded to the rental of an attic she owned by the Neverland company, which sublet it to a company worker at that time. To the fact that Roselló paid almost double the market price, Millán responded that the businessman was interested in signing a lease with the right to purchase, although he later refused to exercise it.

The Civil Guard argued before the judge that for the correct analysis of the "numerous effects in documentary and digital support" that were seized in the registry of the Arroyomolinos City Council, they were analyzing the statements they took from different witnesses, for which they also requested all those that have occurred in court.

The judge transferred the parties, the Prosecutor's Office was in favor and the defenses of Millán and the investigated businessman, Roselló, opposed. Millán's defense argued that the Civil Guard, acting as judicial police, is assigned to support the court, and not the other way around. "It is already quite surprising that it is the UCO that has developed the investigation directed by the Court in these proceedings," says Millán against the elite unit of the Civil Guard.

The mayor's defense refers to the fact that the UCO is the unit that investigates the punic casefrom which the original information arose about possible corruption in the Arroyomolinos City Council and that Judge Manuel García Castellón sent to a court in Navalcarnero because the facts were not related to his investigation at the National High Court.

Judge José Manuel García Marfil has been replaced in court by the titular magistrate, Lidia Prada Zurdo, who on June 9 agreed to transfer Millán and Roselló's statements to the UCO. Both have resorted again. Now, the mayor alleges: “The instructions given by the court to which I have the honor to address were carried out by the UCO and the procedures agreed upon by the court itself were carried out. What makes no sense is keeping a police force informed of the rest of the proceedings carried out by the court itself or even by any other police force”.

Source link