The defense in the Pujol case discredits the UDEF investigator: "Did he Google it?"

Madrid"I don't know." And so on, up to 35 times. The head of the Economic and Fiscal Crime Unit (UDEF) that prepared the reports in the Pujol case admitted today that he may have made inaccuracies and errors in his reports. After testified yesterday for more than five hours Answering questions from the prosecution and the state attorney, the defense lawyers cornered him for six hours today, attempting to discredit the hypotheses and inferences he made in the twenty or so reports he signed. "We are witnessing his ineptitude," summarized Cristóbal Martell, Jordi Pujol Ferrusola's lawyer, at one point during his cross-examination. When Pau Ferrer, the lawyer for four of the former president of the Generalitat's children, asked him about the inheritance of their grandfather Florenci—which the witness questioned yesterday—he admitted to searching for information on Google. He also admitted to using the famous search engine at other times. So much so that Oriol Rusca, the lawyer for Mercè Gironès—the eldest son's ex-wife—mocked him for it.

–Did anything happen in the world between 2006 and 2009 that could have changed the valuation of any property? Did you take into account that there was a real estate crisis? Did you Google it?

Rusca has put his finger on the sore spot regarding some of the statements made by the UDEF instructor to, ironically, "assess the rigor" of the investigation. "You're acting based on what Google says," he retorted. Later, after one of the breaks, Álvaro Ibáñez avoided repeating it: "I won't repeat the search engine so there aren't any more jokes."

The hypothetical pressures

The first to question Ibáñez was Cristóbal Martell, Jordi Pujol Ferrusola's lawyer, who focused on challenging the conclusions reached in the UDEF reports and questioning all the omissions. "Didn't you find it relevant?" he repeatedly asked. For example, the fact that some of the municipalities involved in the operations under suspicion had mayors from the PSC (Socialist Party of Catalonia). Or the possibility of asking the members of the Port of Tarragona board if they had received "pressure or incitement" at any point: "That's not my role," he replied. After Ibáñez stated on Wednesday that a diary belonging to Jordi Pujol Ferrusola detailed meetings with high-ranking officials of the Generalitat (Catalan government), Martell countered that the cover stated the diary belonged to Jordi Puig Godés. "Isn't that crucial?" he asked. "A diary can contain many things and still be handwritten," Ibáñez defended himself.

One of the tense moments came when Martell asked him if the information "has exchange value," a question the witness didn't understand. "I won't give economics lessons, since you said you have a lot of degrees," the lawyer retorted. "I still don't understand. I'm just saying I'm ignorant, that's all," the witness replied, annoyed. And the presiding judge scolded him: "This isn't the attitude of a witness. You should be cooperative. It's quite basic; I'm sure you know that perfectly well."

"I can't vouch for it."

Another lawyer who has refuted the UDEF investigator's account is José Antonio Choclán, lawyer for businessman Luis Delso. The focus was on an alleged meeting between him and Jordi Pujol Ferrusola in 2006, which served as a pretext for searching his home and the headquarters of his company, Isolux. The witness ultimately admitted that his only indication of the meeting came from a leaked email. The WorldBut he couldn't verify that the meeting took place: "If I had to swear to it, I couldn't because I don't know if it happened," he finally admitted. Despite this, the police report stated that money laundering had been discussed at the meeting. "It was poorly worded," he said this Thursday.

Neither Villarejo nor Pino

For his part, Diego Artacho, the lawyer for Carles Sumarroca – whose family filed a lawsuit regarding Operation Catalonia that targeted, among others, the UDEF investigator – asked him directly about the intervention of the patriotic policeÁlvaro Ibáñez has categorically denied this. He responded that he received no instructions and had no relationship with either Commissioner José Manuel Villarejo or the then Deputy Director of Operations of the Spanish National Police, Eugenio Pino. "It particularly offends me," he complained.