A figurehead investigated in the macro-scam led by José Luis Moreno confirms payments for requesting financing

He met the producer on three occasions but points out that he did not give him instructions but Alberto Aguilera

MADRID, 15 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) -

An alleged figurehead investigated for his possible participation in the macro-scam led by television producer José Luis Moreno, among others, has confirmed before the investigating judge that he received cash from one of the ringleaders, Antonio Aguilera, in exchange for signing as attorney for companies and go request financing from bank branches.

The statement of this person, Carla López, who is charged for appearing as administrator of Liquorería Margallo and Restauración Fina Madrid, investigated for fraudulent operations and controlled by Aguilera and another defendant, Antonio Salazar, took place last Friday, and testified to questions from both his lawyer and the Prosecutor's Office that his relationship with the plot began at the end of 2016. "My job consisted of that, (...) going to ask for financing," he confirmed before the investigating judge of the National Court according to Legal sources consulted by Europa Press.

Asked if she coincided with José Luis Moreno, the front man indicated that she met him in Aguilera's office, that she saw him about three times, that on one occasion they went together to an Abanca branch and that after a talk between Moreno and Aguilera with a worker signed the documentation. However, she qualified when asked by Moreno's defense, that she "never" received instructions from him.

In line, he explained before the magistrate of the National Court Ismael Moreno that in certain bank offices the treatment was friendly and nothing had to be explained when he went for financing, and he cited a person named María Belén, from Abanca, with whom Aguilera "had a personal relationship." In fact, he indicated that he knew that this bank employee had a sentimental relationship with the alleged ringleader of the plot.

These visits to the banks, she pointed out that so many that she had lost count, occurred when she was approaching Madrid -- "Antonio paid my expenses" -, and confirmed that it was also sometimes with other defendants such as Raquel Garrido or Marta Dillet.

However, he said he did not remember having signed checks or promissory notes, although he acknowledged that "a lot of documentation" was put in front of him to sign.

To questions from the Public Prosecutor, he pointed out that in total he would have collected 100,000 euros from the plot in five years by means of a transfer to his personal account, and that he always received a commission for each signature.

The investigators divide the alleged plot into two organizations: one led by the television producer José Luis Moreno, Antonio Aguilera and Antonio Salazar, dedicated since 2017 to "fraud and defrauding banks and private investors", "to the falsification of bank effects such as checks and promissory notes" and "money laundering"; and another, headed by Carlos Brambilla, an alleged drug trafficker who would have used said structure to launder money.

According to the judicial report, Moreno and Aguilera would be the "most responsible" and Salazar, the third in action. Each one would have a function. The producer, "as a well-known public figure, would lend his name as a calling card" in order to easily get the financing they would pretend to need to get a film project off the ground. Therefore, he "was the main recipient of the funds obtained."

That money would then pass into the hands of Aguilera and Salazar. The two would have "extensive knowledge in banking and commercial operations", so they would be in charge of creating the companies, "make-up" them, appoint administrators and present them to the banking entities as the recipients of the necessary financing for said projects. In reality, they would lack any activity.

Through this network of "shell companies" managed by alleged front men, both organizations would move "large amounts of cash" to which they tried to get out with income that they passed off as benefits from their commercial work or with cash injections for which they would have the complicity of bank employees who would take their commission in exchange for introducing this money into the legal circuit.