The Supreme Court Did Not See The Church’S Crime In The Dina Case And Sent It Back For A Hearing
2021-01-28 | by CusiGO
The Supreme Court sent the lawsuit against Pablo Iglesias, the second vice president of the government, in the Dina case back to the national court. According to the office of the prosecutor, the criminal chamber found that there was no conclusive evidence to support any of the crimes attributed to Iglesias by judge Manuel Garcia castron. The supreme court order is a comprehensive amendment to the high court judge’s instructions, urging him to complete the investigation before deciding whether another reasonable statement against the church should be submitted to the high court.
The order issued by the Criminal Court on Wednesday is the file of a public investigation by the Supreme Court into the government’s second vice president, Manuel Garc í a Castell ó n, a national court judge, accused him of fabricating a conspiracy to claim to be a victim of the national sewers after the mobile phone of former president Dina bousselham was stolen. The high court has the power to take action against the church on the basis of religious status and finds that there is no reason to blame the second vice president for any crime at this time.
The high court severely criticized Garcia castron’s actions. In October, he submitted a reasonable statement to the Supreme Court, accusing Iglesias of discovering and divulging secrets, one of computer damage, one of accusation and false accusation. The order of the criminal chamber, where justice Andres palomor served as the reporter, overturned these arguments and concluded that Garcia castron should not ask the Supreme Court to take action against the church.
The Supreme Court handed the case back to the trial judge and urged him to use every means to take a series of steps that the court held he had to complete before he could bring the case to the Supreme Court. These include the busselham declaration, which calls for the ratification or withdrawal of facts relating to the crimes of discovery and disclosure of secrets, as the Supreme Court recalls that the criminal code requires victims to file complaints in order to take action against these crimes.
Garcia castron acknowledged this in a reasonable statement, but said that if she thought there were signs of crime, the Supreme Court should summon the former church president. The court rejected the theory and urged the hearing judge to call buselham, who had told the judge in several letters that he had not accused the leader of divulging the contents of his mobile phone. If our former staff don’t complain to Iglesias, Garcia castron can’t continue to commit the crime of divulging secrets.
It’s not easy for the judge to maintain the other two crimes he believes the vice president committed. With regard to computer damage caused by damage to the mobile phone card taken from the former trial judge, the chamber held that bousselham must also be subpoenaed to ask if the contents of the card were accessible when Iglesias received it, as he provided contradictory versions. The last one keeps our leaders away from so-called credit card damage. The judges also considered that it was necessary to expand computer expertise on credit card failures in order to identify the reasons for obstructing access to information, the systems or technologies used to delete or damage information, and the possibility of retrieving all such data and the date of the last access.
As for the indictment and false statement crime, the Supreme Court severely condemned Garcia castron, holding that he “abandoned all kinds of investigation routes” and had no conclusive evidence to support the argument that “there is no greater rationality”. In addition, the judges recalled that no action could be brought against the alleged false complainants until the judge or court who knew of the alleged infringement had made a final judgment or order, dismissed the action or filed the case, which was not the case in this case.
A reasonable statement relates to the second aspect, that is, the member state of the United Nations, MEDOS Gloria ilezo, but is limited to charges and false accusations. The Supreme Court also closed the case without evidence on the same grounds as the church.
In addition, the order declared that there was a lack of jurisdiction over Marta flor, Raul cabaledo and Ricardo desaferella, the minors mentioned in the reasonable statement.
Read the supreme court order in Dina. If you can’t see it, click here.