If it has not been possible to file the case, at least there should be no conviction. The Madrid Prosecutor's Office has presented a document in Court 41 of Madrid requesting the acquittal of Begoña Gómez of the crimes of influence peddling and embezzlement for which she will sit in the dock before a jury along with her advisor in La Moncloa. The popular accusation asks for a sentence of 13 years in prison for the wife of the President of the Government.
The written conclusions - which will now be sent to the Provincial Court, in charge of holding the trial - considers that the creation, financing and operation of the Complutense chair occurred "in accordance with the regulations" and there were no irregularities.
He highlights that its creation was agreed upon with the rector in a meeting in La Moncloa "with the university closed due to the pandemic" and that the vice-rector accepted the task of launching it "as long as the requirements established in the regulations were met." The prosecutor does not detect anything that indicates influence peddling.
Within that chair of Competitive Social Transformation, software was developed with which, according to the accusation, Gómez sought to profit, which would represent a crime of embezzlement, since the funds used belonged to the Complutense. "None of those investigated have benefited financially from the computer software creation activities," states the letter from the senior prosecutor for economic crimes, José Manuel San Baldomero, on this point.
He adds that there is no evidence that the UCM "has suffered financial damage as a result of the activities carried out" and that the software is currently still at the disposal of the university center. The Complutense, for its part, estimated the money spent on the development of the technological platform at 113,000 euros, a figure that it claims from the accused in the event of conviction.
Regarding the fact that Begoña Gómez created a company with the same name as the chair and the platform, the prosecutor indicates that "it had a residual relevance." There are only two incomes that do not reach 7,000 euros, "without proof of the purpose or origin of the same and without evidence that they were due to the exploitation of the [computer] program."
Thus, it has not been detected that the company or the defendants "have carried out commercial exploitation of the aforementioned computer program, nor is there evidence that they have attempted to show ownership or property to third parties, recognizing at all times that it was the property of the UCM." It concludes by indicating that the president's wife spread "the employment and use of the digital tool [...] free of charge and without proof of profit motive or effective economic network."
The second branch of the alleged embezzlement is the use for private professional purposes of his advisor in Moncloa, Cristina Álvarez. On this point, the Madrid Prosecutor's Office highlights that the advisor only made "specific" efforts related to the chair, within a context of participation in "numerous public and private events" of the president's wife. He adds that this did not prevent her from fulfilling "the inherent functions" of her position as a temporary official, so it cannot be considered that there was embezzlement.
The Madrid Court has yet to determine who will serve as presiding judge in the jury trial, as well as the date of its holding.
