The lawyer and criminologist Pablo de Palacio has offered a complete explanation of the judicial situation of Alberto González Amador, known as the boyfriend of the president of the Community of Madrid, Isabel Ayuso. In an exclusive interview with ElConstitucional.es, De Palacio detailed the keys that could mark the development of his judicial process and the legal panorama he faces.
According to the expert, the Supreme Court has already ruled, albeit tangentially, on the relevance of the conviction for disclosure of secrets of the former Attorney General of the State, Álvaro García Ortiz, in the case. "It already said in a way that it did not have direct significance for fundamental rights, in this case of Alberto González Amador," he explained. This suggests that although there may have been disclosure of secrets or other irregularities, these issues would not be decisive for the main case facing the accused.
De Palacio pointed out that the process has already entered the oral trial phase, which makes González Amador formally accused, and that the defensive strategy presented by his team has a clear focus: to allege possible violations of fundamental rights through the processing of preliminary issues. “It is a very intelligent defensive strategy… but that does not mean at all that there is a high probability that His Lordship will finally end up accepting that thesis,” he added.
The lawyer also detailed the complexity of the case, which includes a medial concurso of crimes: on the one hand, tax fraud exceeding 120,000 euros; on the other, document forgery related to the creation of invoices to justify expenses. De Palacio explained that the defense could argue an error in the calculation of the Treasury, which would significantly alter the nature of the alleged crime, taking it from the criminal to the administrative sphere.
In summary, according to De Palacio, although the defense seeks strategies to minimize legal impacts, González Amador's judicial outlook remains complicated and with an uncertain prognosis, given the decisions already adopted by the country's highest judicial body.
