Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured UE Vladimir Putin Italia Terrorismo Ucrania

The Prosecutor's Office asks the Supreme Court to maintain the sentences for the 'Osasuna case'

The defense of the ex-manager of the club says that his rights have been violated and considers that he should be acquitted.

- 1 reads.

The Prosecutor's Office asks the Supreme Court to maintain the sentences for the 'Osasuna case'

The defense of the ex-manager of the club says that his rights have been violated and considers that he should be acquitted


The Prosecutor's Office has asked the Supreme Court to maintain the sentences for those convicted of the so-called 'Osasuna case', considering it proven that members of the Board of Directors of Club Atlético Osasuna agreed to give priority to former Betis players Antonio Amaya and Xabi Torres to "alter the results of the sports competition".

The prosecutor Paloma Abad has stressed that in 2010 article 286 bis four was introduced in the Penal Code to "value" and "protect cleanliness and the values ​​that sport transmits" and has stressed that the sentence in the 'Osasuna case' was the first in Spain that he convicted for the crime of sports corruption.

"Here the facts to which the ruling refers are those corresponding to the payment of premiums to third parties. It is not a matter of rigging results that can harm the bets. It is not about premiums to their own holders. We are talking about prioritizing to a third party; that is, to intervene in the normal functioning of the rest of the equipment with a purpose", he said.

The Public Ministry has ruled in the framework of the hearing that was held this Wednesday in the Supreme Court to hear the appeals of eight of the nine convicted against the sentence of the Audiencia de Navarra.

The sentence established that the leaders of Osasuna paid "a total of 650,000 euros" to the Betis players to "encourage their victory against Real Valladolid on matchday 37 of the 2013/2014 season" and to let them "win in the match that pitted them against Osasuna on matchday 38".

In the public hearing, presided over by magistrate Julián Sánchez Melgar, the defenses have ruled against the sentence that handed down sentences that ranged between 8 years and 8 months in prison and one year in prison for crimes of misappropriation, falsehood in commercial document, false accounting and sports corruption.

The accusations made by Club Atlético Osasuna and the National Professional Soccer League have coincided with the criteria of the Prosecutor's Office and have asked the Supreme Court to maintain the sentences.

At the beginning of the hearing, Ángel Vizcay's lawyer has assured that his client must be acquitted because with the conviction of the 'Osasuna case' his fundamental rights were violated, including the right to effective judicial protection and the presumption of innocence.

The Court of Navarra imposed the most serious sentence on Vizcay: 4 years and 3 months for misappropriation; 2 years and 9 months for two crimes of falsifying a commercial document in an ideal bankruptcy with a crime of accounting falsification; and 5 months for sports corruption. In total, 8 years and 8 months in prison.

The lawyer has defended that the motivation of the sentence "is not duly founded" and that, in addition, it is "arbitrary and erroneous in the assessment of the evidence". In his opinion, "there is no continuing crime of misappropriation in terms of the evidence" included in the resolution. On this point, he has emphasized that "one who has not appropriated anything cannot be convicted of misappropriation."

Likewise, it has denounced one that "there is not sufficient proof of charge" to violate Vizcay's right to the presumption of innocence or evidence that he participated in the crime of document forgery attributed to him. He has also insisted that "above" the former manager of Osasuna there was "a general director and a board of directors." "Mr. Vizcay was a blind instrument to the orders of his superiors", he has said.

In line, he has pointed out that "if everything that has been done has been for the benefit of Osasuna himself and there has been no enrichment, Osasuna should not be compensated", as, in his opinion, neither should the former president of the club Miguel Ángel. Archanco.

Within the framework of the hearing, the defenses of former Betis players Xabier Torres and Antonio Amaya have stressed before the court that neither of them played in the matches that, according to the sentence, were rigged. Both were sentenced to one year in prison and two years of disqualification from professional soccer activity for a crime of sports corruption.

Torres' lawyer has ensured that his client's presumption of innocence has been violated and that the evidence has been wrongly assessed. He has insisted that the player in December 2013 --months before the events-- suffered a "very serious injury" that prevented him from playing the indicated matches. "Not being the author of the crime, because he did not participate in any of the meetings, the only thing that is possible is to issue an acquittal," he said.

Amaya's lawyer, in addition to emphasizing that his client did not play the games, has stressed that "there is no proof of the charge", that "certainties cannot be drawn from mere suspicions" and that "not a single witness has said the match was rigged".

The lawyer has also highlighted sports statistics. "Osasuna didn't even have a chance of saving themselves even after winning", he said while he assured that Betis played better. "There is no match-fixing," he added, then asked "how is it going to be a fraud to win."

The lawyer in charge of the defense of the then president of Osasuna Miguel Ángel Archanco has also alleged a violation of the right of his client to have a process with all the guarantees.

Archanco was sentenced to 6 years and 8 months in prison: 3 years and 8 months for a continued crime of misappropriation; to 2 years for a crime of falsifying a commercial document in an ideal bankruptcy with a crime of accounting falsification; and 1 year in prison for a crime of sports corruption.

His defense has ensured that he was tried by a court "chosen 'ad hoc'" that was constituted in an "opaque" manner, for which reason, in his opinion, "it does not enjoy the impartiality and independence that it should have."

The defense of the then treasurer of the board of directors Sancho Bandrés has agreed with this argument and has also alleged the violation of his client's right to a process with all the guarantees due to the way in which the court that delivered the sentence was chosen. The lawyer, in addition, has assured that "everything that is said in the sentence to justify the accounting crime is mere conjecture."

On the sidelines, Archanco's lawyer has stated that there was a violation of rights by allowing the soccer league to intervene in the process as a private prosecution.

"He was not legitimized," he said, while defending that if his participation in the procedure was accepted, it should have been done under the figure of popular accusation. "He is neither offended nor harmed by the crime of misappropriation, nor by commercial counterfeiting nor by sports corruption," he added.

The lawyer has also insisted that the evidence for which Archanco has been convicted has been "insufficiently and improperly reasoned."

For his part, the defense of the former vice president of the board of directors of Osasuna Juan Antonio Pascual has assured that his client was sentenced without there being "sufficient evidence" of his participation in the crimes attributed to him and has stressed that "it is not can allow" to be sentenced for belonging to the club's board of directors.

Likewise, the lawyer of the former manager Jesús Peralta has spoken, who has criticized that his client has been treated the same as the former manager of the club who, according to what he has had an "autonomous action". "Mr. Peralta could not extract money from the accounts. He had no signature," he has said.

The defense of the real estate agency Cristina Valencia has also filed an appeal, considering that her presumption of innocence has been violated.

Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.