The husband of the Dana judge admits to the CGPJ that he was in victim statements due to his wife's "emotional exhaustion"

The judge investigating the 2024 Dana tragedy in Valencia recently obtained the support of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) with the filing of the complaints filed against her.

The two investigated in the case, the former Valencian counselor Salomé Pradas and the former regional secretary Emilio Argüeso, denounced the participation of the magistrate's husband in the judicial investigation before the governing body of the judges. She denied it, but he - also a magistrate - admits in a report that he accompanied her in the statements of several victims due to the "emotional exhaustion" she suffered.

This is stated in a letter, dated October 1, 2025, that Jorge Martínez Rubio sent to the CGPJ to defend himself against accusations that could have overturned the investigation. Their arguments are included in the CGPJ resolution that proposed filing the complaints against Nuria Ruiz Tobarra, and which has been notified to Argüeso's defense.

The CGPJ invoked the illegality of the recording of the judge's husband to prove his interference in the investigation to dismiss the complaints. According to its resolution, the reported facts "have not been sufficiently proven." However, it is the judge himself who recognizes that he was present in the victims' statements before the judge, although he denies having conditioned the instruction.

"It is true that some of the victims have seen me with my wife," maintains the magistrate, "but this was due [...] to the emotional exhaustion that I suffered during some of the statements," he affirms regarding his wife, who in an order went so far as to censure the campaign of "atrocious machismo" with the insinuations of her husband's participation in the investigation.

According to the magistrate, the harshness of the statements - in which the victims recounted how their relatives had died by drowning - prompted him to be with his wife "at specific moments when she was making the statements." Even so, he clarifies: "I have not violated any professional secret, nor have I communicated or revealed anything, nor received any complaint from any family member, nor has the procedure suffered any type of damage."

The judge not only denies that he participated or directed the investigation, but also censures that the complaints about his alleged interference point to a political interest: "The characterization made by the information, the evidence provided, the evidence requested by one of the defenses, would turn my wife into a simple instrument of my will that would obey a political inclination."

In this sense, he explains that the "theory" of those who attack him and his wife would be the following: "As an 'openly leftist' person, I have directed my wife Nuria in the procedure, which I would control to unsuspected extremes."