The magistrate of the Court of Violence against Women number 8 of Madrid interrogates this Tuesday the former deputy operational director DAO of the National Police, José Ángel González, and the woman who reported him for alleged sexual assault, both summoned to testify starting at 10:30 hours. González resigned from his position after the judge admitted the complaint for processing and summoned him as a defendant, stating in an order that the reported facts “make presume the possible existence of sexual assault crimes”.
The complaint, filed by a subordinate agent, also points to possible crimes of coercion, psychological injuries, and embezzlement of public funds, with the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superiority. According to the document, the complainant and the accused maintained “a relationship of affection” marked by “a manifest institutional power asymmetry,” a situation that, according to the complainant, was “systematically instrumentalized to generate and maintain a relational dynamic of control, domination, and psychological submission.” The victim states that she tried to end the relationship “on multiple occasions,” without succeeding.
After the breakup, the ex-DAO would have initiated, according to the complaint, “an obsessive conduct of harassment and unwanted contact.” The reported events are situated on April 23, 2025, when the woman received “multiple phone calls” from González for her to come urgently. Given her refusal, he would have used his authority for her to leave her workplace and come in a police vehicle. Subsequently, after meeting in a restaurant, both moved to a dwelling where, according to the complainant, the ex-DAO initiated “a physical approach of a sexual nature” which was “rejected verbally, expressly, emphatically, and continuously.” Despite this, he would have continued with “an aggressive conduct of a sexual nature characterized by physical violence and environmental intimidation.”
For his part, González denies the facts and maintains that he offered the complainant to leave the home, attributing the complaint to “jealousy”. His defense points out “contradictions” between the account and a recording provided as evidence, which, he claims, contains “reproaches of jealousy”, “affectionate expressions” and a “tone of personal trust”.
The complainant has provided audios, call records and messages, requesting her “full reservation”. The judge has guaranteed “confidentiality”, although he has delivered a copy to the defense. Likewise, the woman has asked to investigate a possible leak of her identity for possible crimes of disclosure of secrets.
