A high-profile trial is underway in Madrid, with businessman Javier López Madrid at its center. He is accused of allegedly hiring former police commissioner José Manuel Villarejo to pressure doctor Elisa Pinto. However, on the second day of hearings, it was revealed that investigators do not have a single document confirming any payment for these services.
The chief police inspector leading the investigation told the court directly that, despite all efforts, no evidence of payment had been found. This became a strong argument for the defense, as the prosecution relies solely on the assumption of a bribe. Both López Madrid and Villarejo firmly deny any financial arrangements between them.
Investigation details
According to the inspector, the investigation established that in the summer of 2013, López Madrid was indeed in contact with Villarejo. They discussed a possible commissioner’s job related to Elisa Pinto. At the same time, the businessman and the doctor were already embroiled in a protracted conflict, with both sides accusing each other of harassment.
Investigators found audio recordings, handwritten notes, and some documents that could suggest preparations for cooperation. But as the police officer emphasized, there is no direct evidence of any money transfer. No contracts, or the usual reports or estimates typically prepared for clients of Cenyt — the organization linked to Villarejo — were found.
Arguments of the Parties
The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, notably, is not involved in this case at all. In their view, the investigation lacks sufficient grounds to bring bribery charges. During the inspector’s interrogation, the prosecutor pointed out the absence of standard documents that typically accompanied Villarejo’s private assignments. There were no estimates, no standard reports, not even a basic order form.
The only hint of a possible monetary transfer was an entry in Villarejo’s diary dated September 4, 2013: “Entrega 10 a cuenta” (“Transfer of 10 as an advance”). The inspector noted that this date coincided with the first contacts between López Madrid and the commissioner. However, Villarejo’s lawyer immediately questioned the significance of this entry, reminding that such advance payments were typically much higher—40,000 euros or more. In some cases, according to the inspector, the amount could be lowered to 20,000 for friends, but 10,000 was far too little for services of this nature.
Defendants’ Testimonies
The trial continues, with not only López Madrid and Villarejo in the dock, but also the commissioner’s partner, Rafael Redondo. At the first hearing, López Madrid admitted meeting with Villarejo in August 2013 but categorically denied hiring him. According to him, he never gave the commissioner a cent nor instructed him to act against Pinto. The businessman claims the meeting took place on a friend’s recommendation.
Elisa Pinto’s lawyer, however, maintains the opposite. She is seeking six years in prison for López Madrid and Villarejo on bribery charges. According to her, the businessman and the commissioner had numerous contacts in the following months, as evidenced by dozens of phone calls.
Doubts and gaps
There are too many unknowns in this case. Investigators have only circumstantial evidence, and the absence of key documents calls the entire foundation of the accusation into question. Even if the parties actually had some kind of arrangement, it’s extremely difficult to prove it based solely on a single diary entry and phone calls.
Police admit: Villarejo usually documented his private assignments in great detail, leaving a paper trail behind. This time—nothing. No reports, no budgets, not even drafts. This raises questions not only from the defense, but also from observers of the proceedings. Why, if the job truly existed, is there not a single document to confirm it?
Case continues
Court hearings on this case are expected to last at least until next week. New interviews, new details, and possibly unexpected twists lie ahead. For now, the main intrigue is whether the prosecution will be able to find any further evidence to shed light on the mysterious relationship between López Madrid and Villarejo.
The situation is unfolding, and neither side is willing to back down. Whether there was an actual order and if money changed hands remains an open question. However, it is already clear that without substantial evidence, this case risks turning into yet another legal labyrinth, where the truth may never come to light.
