May 14, 2022 10:19 am

The judge rules out keeping the Dina case alive after the failed expert card

Judge Manuel García Castellón ends the investigation of the Dina case. After the failed expert of the Scientific Police,
that he has not been able to access the mobile card stolen from Dina Bousselham
(former advisor to Pablo Iglesias), to try to find out why it does not work or what it contained, the instructor considers that there are no more procedures to carry out except those that have already been agreed: the statements of her, her partner Ricardo Sa Ferreira and the former director Police Operative Deputy Eugenio Pino.

In a car notified this Thursday, the instructor agreed that there will be no more extensions to investigate this separate piece that was born in March 2019 when among the archives of Commissioner José

Manuel Villarejo images were found that came from Bousselham’s cell phone, part of which had been published in the press. The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor agrees. He had asked the judge to simply let the deadline expire because he does not see that there is more to investigate.

This is striking, because when he filed a direct appeal against the judge’s decision to close the case in October 2020, I reproached him for a “false” closing without investigating the fact that “in the seized folders of Villarejo there is much more information on Dina Bousselham and third parties, published and unpublished” on which no inquiries had been made. They were looking for alleged information intoxication maneuvers by the commissioner and possible accomplices of that action. No longer.

“Once the errands that remain to be carried out are carried out, it is considered that the instruction will be completed, so there is no room for its extension. Since it is not necessary to carry out further investigative steps, since those agreed to date are considered sufficient, there is no reason to extend the period of investigation, which is understood to have ended on January 29, 2022, “says the resolution to the who had access to this newspaper.


This was going to be the line of investigation on the media leg of the alleged Villarejo criminal organization, that he would have obtained contents from Dina Bousselham’s cell phone and then leaked them to the press to harm Pablo Iglesias. With this starting thesis, both she and he, who in March 2019 was about to start an electoral campaign, entered the case as injured parties.

But everything was diluted when a year after the investigation began, the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor pointed out signs of crime in the conduct of Pablo Iglesias. The reason, that rreceived the memory card of Dina Bousselham’s cell phone from the president of Grupo Zeta, Antonio Asensio and checked its content. Knowing who it was from, that it contained intimate material and that, in addition, her phone had been stolen a few months ago, she kept it and did not say anything to its owner. When after a few months – it has not been clarified how many – he returned it, the card did not work.

Conclusion: computer damage and disclosure of secrets. The Prosecutor’s Office proposed to call Bousselham because if he pardoned this last crime, there was no cause against Iglesias, since these computer damages would have been minor in any case. He also asked to expel Iglesias from the case and the judge did so, but his decision was amended then by the Criminal Chamber of the National Court, appeal through. The court established that if these criminal indications concurred, what it had to do was send the matter to the Supreme Court because Iglesias was still vice president and so on.

Back and forth to Supreme

That was the next step, in October 2020. By then the piece had been open for a year and a half and only Villarejo himself and two journalists from the defunct magazine Interviú, Alberto Pozas and Luis Rendueles, were charged. Asensio, who was never charged, had given the card to Iglesias. The journalists, who never published its content, gave a copy to Villarejo who, according to what he told them, was investigating Podemos at the time. It was early 2016, the dates of the original investigation into alleged irregular financing from Venezuela that ended up shelved and now, by the way, has been reopened.

García Castellón, while sending the Iglesias matter to the Supreme Court, closed the rest of the investigation by putting Villarejo and the two journalists on trial. They implicated themselves, because they were their own statements explaining the circumstances in which they delivered the copy to the commissioner, which earned them the imputation for revealing secrets. The flash drive they delivered hasn’t turned up. And the content of Bousselham’s card cannot be contrasted with the one found in the hands of Villarejo because the device is damaged.

The point is that the Supreme Court told García Castellón that there was not enough. That to agree on the imputation of Iglesias more evidence was needed: He had to dissect that card and find out if the damage it suffered had been deliberately inflicted., try to retrieve its content and clarify the last access date. The instructor’s thesis is that if Pablo Iglesias received the card and it worked, and when he delivered it to Bousselham it no longer worked, whatever happened to the device was up to him. Or at least one of the two.

The remaining statements

But at this point, with the expert opinion unsuccessful because, as reported by this newspaper, only half of the content has been accessed but not read, that line of investigation has no further course. It remains to listen to Bousselham so that, in line with the order of the Supreme Court, he expressly pronounces on whether he forgives Pablo Iglesias for revealing secrets or wants to proceed against him, which is unlikely. There the journalists, like the defense of Villarejo, will have the opportunity to insist that it is debatable that of forgiving some yes and others not when the illicit, revelation of secrets, is the same and the object, which is the card, also.

Eugenio Pino will also be heard, because the Criminal Chamber ordered it so, so that he says if indeed at that time there was in the Police that commanded investigations on Podemos, as the journalists say that Villarejo let them know. You can hardly say otherwise when the cause that has now been reopened in the Hearing Nacional with the declarations of Chavista general Hugo Carvajal is just from that year. In addition, it is instructed in the same court.

Finally, Ricardo Sa Ferreira, the man who said that after Dina Bousselham’s mobile was stolen nothing was recovered and that he then personally sent the card to a repair service in the United Kingdom. He, like her, is still playing an accusation for false testimony, although that, if it arrives, will be the matter of the ordinary courts.

Comments (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.