Businessman Juan Carlos Barrabés has appealed his accusation in the case of influence peddling and corruption in the companies that Judge Juan Carlos Peinado is investigating, because he considers it “unjustified”. In the document presented by his defense, to which elDiario.es has had access, the “serious” state of health in which the 54-year-old businessman is found, and under which he had to testify as a witness subjected to heavy medication on July 15.
Four days after his testimony as a witness, Judge Peinado changed Barrabés' status from witness to investigation, without warning him during the appearance, which lasted almost an hour, that he could incriminate himself. If this had been the case, Peinado should have interrupted the testimony and summoned him on another occasion, accompanied by a lawyer.
This is one of the aspects of his accusation that Barrabés’ lawyer questions. The businessman has hired Javier Sánchez-Junco, an anti-corruption prosecutor on leave and a renowned criminal lawyer who has defended Juan Carlos I, among others, to represent him.
“Between my client's statement and the order we are now appealing, there was only a document submitted by the popular accusation of the political party Vox, in which, without giving any reason or justification for it, it requested that my client's statement be considered examined, substantially pointing out that he had given answers 'with a lack of memory and specificity of dates',” the defense describes.
Sclerosis, thrombosis, chemotherapy…
Sánchez-Junco explains that Barrabés, as the judge knows, suffers from a disease – omitted here out of respect for the privacy of the subjects under investigation – but that for the purposes of the case it has consequences as serious as 'sclerotic lesions' or 'thrombosis', and that above all requires aggressive chemotherapy and radiotherapy. “It is not necessary to indicate the profound physical and psychological impact that a treatment such as the one indicated produces”, adds the lawyer.
Despite this, Sánchez-Junco continues, the judge tried to have Barrabés testify via videoconference from the hospital. In the meantime, the businessman was discharged from the hospital and was able to do so from his home, where he continues treatment with trips to the medical center.
His testimony, he continues, “was developed in an absolutely harmless way.” Only the judge and Vox, which leads the popular accusation, asked about it. The questions, according to the lawyer, did not relate to possible criminal acts, “they were more informative” and “obviously [estuvieron] without any harmful dye.”
“Despite his illness and the high dose of medication to which he was subjected (and which he mentioned in the statement), he answered all the questions put to him without evading any answer and offered to discuss this if necessary. I did not know and could not remember,” the lawyer said.
But despite the two reports from the Guardia Civil excluding evidence of a crime, Peinado changed his status as a witness to that of an investigator four days after the statement.
The lawyer places special emphasis on the charge that if the judge considered that the Guardia Civil Barrabés' reports incriminate him, “he should have agreed with the statement as it is being investigated.” “However, it is surprising and devoid of any logic that, despite having it, he retained the status of witness to testify with an oath or promise to tell the truth,” concludes the lawyer.