The Prosecutor's Office charges against the express hearing of the controversial judge Peinado in the 'Begoña Gómez case': "It is not acceptable to override professionals"

The Provincial Prosecutor's Office of Madrid has launched a harsh reproach against the controversial judge Juan Carlos Peinado for the race against time with which the magistrate closed the investigation against Begoña Gómez before retiring. The Public Prosecutor's Office considers that the controversial instructor could have "overstepped his bounds" and showed "little sensitivity" towards the parties by calling the pre-trial hearing from one day to the next.

"It is neither desirable nor acceptable to override professionals," states prosecutor José Manuel San Baldomero in a document dated September 20. The representative of the Public Prosecutor's Office questions timings that he considers far from the usual functioning of the courts and that forced lawyers to reorganize their work in a hurry to be able to attend.

The pronouncement is particularly forceful because it appears within a report contrary to the appeal filed by the defense of Cristina Álvarez, Gómez's assistant at La Moncloa. The Prosecutor's Office understands that the hearing held on September 8 remains valid, but takes advantage of its response to portray the haste with which Peinado conducted the last weeks of an investigation open for more than two years.

The magistrate summoned the parties with barely 24 hours' notice. The defenses of Gómez and Álvarez requested to postpone the appointment. The lawyer for the wife of the President of the Government, Jaime Campaner, had professional commitments in Barcelona and had to take an urgent flight to get to Madrid. The hearing began 45 minutes late to wait for him.

Cristina Álvarez was outside Spain and had communicated that she would return on September 28. Peinado refused to change the scheduling and reproached the investigated for her absence. The Prosecutor's Office also corrects this approach and reminds that leaving the country "in no way constitutes a breach or means placing oneself outside the court's disposition".

Álvarez's physical presence was also not mandatory at that hearing. Her lawyer attended and was able to intervene, so the prosecutor considers that there was no real defenselessness that would require repeating the procedure. This legal conclusion does not diminish the harshness used against the instructor's actions.

Peinado's last race before retiring

The prosecutor's brief states that "it is not usual, habitual, or normal" such haste in setting procedures and schedules. It also describes the "certainly strange situations" caused to professionals and mentions the "intense and fortunate trips" necessary to arrive on time for the appearance.

"Beyond the fact that the instructor may have overstepped and once again shown little sensitivity towards the other participants, the infringement of the norm does not entail nullity if it does not cause real and effective defenselessness," explains San Baldomero.

Peinado justified his refusal to delay the hearing on the duty of celerity enshrined in the Organic Law of the Jury Court. The norm establishes that, once the parties' briefs have been submitted, the judge must convene as soon as possible the proceeding in which it is decided whether to open an oral trial.

The Prosecutor's Office admits that waiting until Álvarez's return could conflict with that obligation and considers that the plan to hold the hearing during September was logical. The problem appears in the manner chosen by Peinado, who accelerated the deadlines to summon the lawyers practically without margin and ended up delaying the act itself so that they could arrive.

The magistrate agreed a few days later to send Begoña Gómez before a popular jury for alleged crimes of influence peddling and embezzlement. Cristina Álvarez will be tried as an alleged necessary cooperator in the embezzlement. The Prosecutor's Office maintains that the investigated facts do not constitute a crime and demands the acquittal of both, while the popular prosecution led by the ultracatholic organization Hazte Oír requests 13 years in prison for Gómez and six for her assistant.

The case began in April 2024 based on a complaint by Manos Limpias supported by journalistic information. During the investigation, the Provincial Court of Madrid has cut part of the perimeter opened by Peinado and has dismissed several crimes that the magistrate tried to keep within the investigation.

Peinado has retired this Sunday upon reaching 72 years of age, the maximum age to continue in active service. The Provincial Court will now take over the procedure and appoint the magistrate in charge of the trial, who will have to study the preliminary issues and possible requests for annulment. The former instructor has hung up his robe after culminating his career against Gómez with a speed that the Prosecutor's Office itself has described as "unusual, rushed, and far from normal".