A book about Grandfather Florenci, the "audience's trump card," and a high-speed train trip: the lawyers' weapons in the Pujol trial to refute the prosecution's case.

San Fernando de Henares"What am I doing here?" "What am I defending myself against?" These are two questions that have been raised by two of the lawyers for the accused businessmen in the trial of the Pujol Ferrusola family which summarize the impotence expressed by the rest of the defense teams during the second session. They all converged in repeatedly denouncing violations of the right to a defense, the right to a fair trial, the right to effective judicial protection, and the adversarial principle. Basically, they believe that the facts that have brought them to trial are vague and indeterminate, and that their description can only lead to exoneration.

Although they were not obligated to attend, the day began with the presence of the seven childrenOnce again, they were dispersed in the dock to avoid a group photograph, and the former president of the Generalitat was absent. Although he could have followed the trial remotely, he chose to remain on the sidelines. He will not reconnect until it is his turn to testify—if that time comes.

The first to speak was Pau Ferrer, lawyer for Marta Pujol, Mireia Pujol, Oleguer Pujol, and Pere Pujol. After criticizing the "factual vagueness" of the accusation, he presented the court with a copy of the book Banca Catalana: more than a bank, more than a crisisThe report, which details the "economic, social, and business profile" of Florenci Pujol Brugat, the father of the former Catalan president, who founded Banca Catalana in 1959, serves as evidence to demonstrate the "plausibility" that the family's fortune in Andorra originated from his "business activities and initiatives" and was passed on to his son and subsequent son. Furthermore, a publication from the Official State Gazette in which Florenci Pujol appears on an "extensive list" of people "sanctioned or investigated" for having money abroad.

"I don't know, tell me"

Subsequently, the defense attorneys for the ten businessmen, accused of money laundering and falsifying commercial documents and facing only two to five years in prison, began their arguments. The lawyers' complaints, with their personal and case-specific nuances, were repeated ad nauseam. In fact, so much so that at the end of the proceedings, the presiding judge, José Ricardo de Prada, complained that they had "heard the same issue eighteen times."

"Can you explain to me what I am being defended against from the point of view of money laundering? Because I don't know. Tell me," urged José Antonio Choclán, Ángel Delso's lawyer, who acknowledged a "serious difficulty" in understanding the charges. "If we don't know what the predicate offense is for the money laundering charge, and if I'm not told which document he falsified, what am I doing here? How am I going to spend my time? How am I going to approach the defense?" asked Luis Jordana de Pozas, Bernardo Domínguez Cederes's lawyer.

Carles Monguilod, Gustavo Buesa's lawyer, drew on personal experience to discredit the prosecution's arguments, recalling that he read the indictment on a high-speed train journey from Barcelona to Madrid: "I've been reading indictments for 42 years. When I arrived back at Sants station," there wasn't a return indictment yet. Displaying his extensive vocabulary, he described the factual account as "labyrinthine, cryptic, and obscure," as well as "indeterminate, vague, incoherent, and contradictory." Certain adjectives have been repeatedly used by various levels of the legal community.

Monguilod wasn't the only one to complain about facing the defense. José María Fuster Fabra, Josep Mayola's lawyer, presented the money laundering charge as a "wild card" when "you don't know what else to bring up." "This lawyer is lost because what he doesn't quite understand is how a story that seems to suggest a kind of influence peddling becomes money laundering," he admitted. And Ana Bernaola, Alejandro Guerrero's lawyer, lamented that in the entire prosecution's indictment, which is over 200 pages long, the "specific mention" of her client "is confined to two paragraphs."

A "prospective" and tainted investigation

Beyond the recurring complaints, there have been others also related to Operation Catalonia. Diego Artacho, lawyer for Carles Sumarroca and Claverol, has denounced the investigation as having a "clearly speculative character." And Óscar Morales, lawyer for Ángel Delso, has stated that, despite the fact that the USB drive provided by former Deputy Director of Operations of the Spanish National Police, Eugenio Pino, was excluded from the case because its origin was suspicious, the judicial police continued investigating facts that "could only have been known" through the USB drive. USB driveTherefore, the "illegally obtained evidence" did not completely disappear from the investigation.