-
More Madrid requests him as a witness and the PSOE plans to join the indictment request
-
The personal accusations also request that the teacher who facilitated the contact testify as a witness.
The pace of the case of the masks of the Madrid City Council is being devilish. With a large part of the instruction made by Anticorruption in the tax proceedings, the popular accusations in person, who exercise PSOE, More Madrid and Podemosdo not want to waste another minute and, after listening to the commission agents Luis Medina and Alberto Luceno before Judge Adolfo Carretero, they have already requested new proceedings.
The one that has reacted most quickly has been that exercised by United We Can, which has requested the head of Court number 47 of Madrid to accuses the cousin of the mayor of Madrid, which gave them access to the Town Hall. “According to what was stated yesterday in his statement, the person from whom he obtained the contact information with whom, in the end, he would have obtained an inordinate economic benefit, would be Carlos Martínez-Almeida,” he points out in his letter, to which EL PERIÓDICO has had access.
It adds that it is a “family member of José Luis Martínez-Almeida, mayor of Madrid, a personal circumstance that could have provided the investigated Luis Medina with direct access to the person whose functions were, at the time of the events, those of management of purchases of sanitary material”.
Hence, he considers it essential to take a statement from him as a defendant, a request to which the accusation brought by the Municipal Group of the PSOE will be added, according to legal sources told this newspaper. More Madrid, for its part, also asks that he be summoned to testify, but in his case as a witness.
listen to the teacher
Related news
According to Luis Medina, Carlos Martínez-Almeida’s contact provided it a college professor named CIS (College for International Studies), Maria Diaz de la Cebosa. hence so much We can, like Más Madrid, have requested your witness statement.
In addition, the first popular accusation also requests that the directors of the offices of the financial entities in which the investigated ones would have obtained the excessive commissions and in which they carried out various acts of patrimonial disposal be summoned as witnesses. Faced with their suspicions due to the increase in assets detected in their accounts, it is for this reason that they presented the documentation that Anticorruption considers false and that has led to their imputation for this crime.