The judge underlines the “caution” of Trapero on 1-O and that nothing proves that he put the Mossos at the service of the trial

The National Court has made public the conviction which acquits Josep Lluís Trapero of the crime of sedition of which he was accused for his role in the events related to the trials of autumn 2017.

As LaSexta argued, in addition to the largest of the Mossos d’Esquadra, the rest of the defendants were also acquitted: Mayor Teresa Laplana, former director of the organ Pere Soler and former secretary general of the Interior of the Generalitat, César Puig.

The tribunal considers that it was not accredited “they had tried to prevent or hinder the respect” of the judicial decisions or that they “had agreed with those who led the process of independence or that they had supported their actions by promoting the passivity of the autonomous police “.

The resolution concludes that “there is no incriminating element which reveals an agreement between the defendants to become an instrument of the independence process and to put at their service the police apparatus dependent on the Generalitat”.

In this sense, the decision exposes the contraindications of this alleged collusion with those who promoted the demonstrations of September 20 and the referendum of October 1.

Trapero warned Puigdemont against the referendum

In the first place, the sentence underlines that Trapero met Carles Puigdemont twice to warn him against the continuation of the referendum and “to suggest his suspension for risk of public order”.

In addition, underlines the sentence, it was transferred “the concern about the possibility that on the day of October 1 there would be alterations of coexistence and the decision of the body to comply with the decisions of judges and prosecutors.

The Criminal Chamber also underlines the fact that the major prepared a device to stop the independentist political positions after the unilateral declaration of independence (DUI). The sentence argues that “there is evidence” that Trapero “prepared the arrest of the president and other members of government and parliament for October 27”.

Trapero’s performance on 20-S and 1-O

In addition, the Court considers that Major Trapero’s action on September 20 “was not in collaboration with the separatists”, but rather that he “faced the situation in a manner which avoided serious damage. “.

In this sense, the decision underlines that “the violent reaction against citizens who have not shown any particular aggressiveness” has been avoided and that, although “all possibilities of mediation” with the leaders of the protest have been exhausted, “she did not give in to the pressure of these independent leaders.”

The magistrates add that “the legal procedure was made possible” and that when the violent altercations began “the public order personnel of the Mossos intervened effectively”.

Regarding 1-O, the ruling explains that Trapero’s actions “appear to be aimed at minimizing the damage, even if that ultimately means holding an illegal referendum.” In this sense, the Court defends its “caution” and that it decided not to use force, even if it made the vote possible.

“Caution in the face of such an extraordinary situation, although it made possible the holding of the illegal referendum and favored the strategy of independence, cannot be considered as cooperation in sedition or as disobedience to judicial orders”, reads -on in the resolution.

“The use of force against defenseless citizens, against elderly people, against entire families, could not be, in this situation, the solution to impose respect for the legal system, even if it was legitimate”, adds judgment.

In addition, the sentence calls into question the testimony of Colonel Diego Pérez de los Cobos of the Civil Guard, assuring that “there is no proof that Major Trapero met Puigdemont in secret”.

Private voting

The 96-page sentence, however, still has 461 pages of private vote from Judge Concepción Espejel, who was in favor of the sedition conviction of Trapero y Soler.

The President of the Chamber maintains that the mayor of Mossos “joined in his efforts” to hold the referendum and that he “put effective means to contribute to such a result”. In this sense, Espejel affirms that the 1-O “the conduct of the Mossos, following the directives and the orders received, was passive, even favorable”.

For the judge, “the relevance of her contribution to the result is indisputable and this was produced in collusion with the politicians on whom she depended at government level”. In this sense, he affirms that the mayor has succeeded in ensuring that the actions of the authority, “far from helping to prevent the referendum, de facto contribute to its realization”.

The magistrate also evokes “repeated obstructionist conduct” by Trapero on the instruction of the higher prosecutor of Catalonia and does not give credibility to the plan of arrest of Puigdemont, declaring that “it would have been conceived after the commission of the crime during the trial and the imputation of the major by the national court “.

semidedicated hosting
Back to top button