Madrid’s Superior Court of Justice has concluded that Eugenio Pino committed the offense of revealing secrets using illegally obtained information
- Holocaust Eugenio Pino acquitted in the first trial against the ‘Patriotic Police’, the former ‘number 2’ of the police
- pen drive case First trial against ‘patriotic police’: Podemos sentenced two commanders to 10 years in prison for maneuvering against Pujol
“The power of the State cannot use shortcuts to prosecute and prosecute illegal acts.” This is one of those statements with Madrid’s Superior Court of Justice The acquittal of the former Deputy Director of Operations (DAO) of Police has been quashed. eugenio pino In this flash drive case, The new conviction for the crime of revealing the secret sees him sentenced to one year in prison, for using information from a flash drive with information on the Pujol family, knowing it was obtained illegally.
Civil and Criminal Chamber It also imposes a fine of 7,200 euros on the former supreme operational command of the police, as well as 2,000 euros to Jordi Pujol Ferusola, the eldest son of the former chairman of the Generalitat. Pino’s trial was held for the first time against the so-called Patriotic Police, who served as Minister of the Interior during the time of Jorge Fernández Diaz. The sentence does not clarify who Pujol used to steal the information contained in Ferusola’s computer, but does say that the accused knew the information came from an illegal act.
The Court is of the view that “from the moment the accused failed to perform the duty he had as a public official to prevent pen drive He had some way, but on the contrary, made it effective with the counterfeit use of its contents, to transmit, reveal or transfer data and documents relating to the confidentiality of Jordi Pujol Ferusola with the explicit intention of harming third parties Proceed. ,
In it he says that his actions “risked” an investigation by the National High Court around the Pujol family, which was believed to be contaminated with the use of information obtained outside the law.
don’t give it to “anyone”
Contrary to the Provincial Court’s acquittal conviction, the TSJ confirms that Pino’s status as a police officer does not absolve him of criminal responsibility for the crime of revealing secrets. Nor did he allege that he only handed over other policemen pen drive “under the so-called formula ‘for further effects’, because no effect can produce or produce the data contained therein”.
Judges of the Provincial Court strongly criticized Pino’s actions, but concluded that, “beyond procedural or formal irregularities”, she was protected by the fulfillment of a duty to promote the prosecution of the crime.
According to the TSJ, instead of sending pen drive Pujol, for the unit investigating Pino, “due to his status as a public official, […] And given that he was aware of the illegal origin of the data and documentation contained in the ‘pendrive’, he should “under no circumstances refrain from giving it to anyone”.
Madrid’s TSJ insists it “cannot use shortcuts” to prosecute the crime. “The exercise of judicial action is consistent with the constitutional model only when it is based on principles that define the right to process with all guarantees. Violation of the rights of the accused, either through an act of a criminal nature, or through infringement of their fundamental rights and freedoms, opens a crack in the structure of the criminal process,” the sentence said.
In addition to UDEF, Pino sent a copy of the flash drive to the CNI, which confirms for magistrates that, pursuant to the offense of disclosing secrets, he sent the information to third parties. The delivery to the CNI was acknowledged by Pino, a circumstance which “by itself violates the duty of confidentiality and custody to which Eugenio Pino was subjected at the time of the events, and is described in Article 197.3 of the Criminal Procedure”. Code: The accused knowing the illegal origin of the electronic device, which contained Pujol Ferusola’s copious personal data, ordered that copies be made and arrangements be made to send them to different recipients. The illegality of their possession to third parties To know the distribution”.
according to the norms of