You are currently viewing The police officers who broke into a party will be tried for trespassing with a popular jury

Updated

The Court of Instruction number 28 has issued an order to open an oral trial against six agents for trespassing, which is no longer appealable

NETWORKS
  • State of alarm The Court of Madrid orders to judge the six policemen of the “kick in the door”
  • controversy The Prosecutor asks to acquit the agents of kicking the door

After more than a year of investigation, six agents of National Police they will sit in the dock for trespassing. The Court of Instruction number 28 of Madrid, investigating the case of these policemen breaking into a party during the state of alarm, has decided that there is sufficient evidence to order the opening of an oral trial. They will be judged by a popular jury in the Provincial Court of Madrid.

The case was very mediatic because a video with the entrance of these agents went viral. The same Minister of the Interior, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, defended the legality of the actions of his subordinates. These entered the house, a floor from the street Lagasca, in the Neighborhood of salamanca, after those inside at the party refused to open the door.

As detailed in the judge’s order dated June 10, to which this newspaper has had access, one of the policemen who was the superior of the others, gave the order to break down the door and arrest those who were in the house. The agents did so, while those at the party recorded a video.

The events occurred on March 21, 2021, when the state of alarm prohibits meetings, and the agents used a ram to open the door. Now the resources have been exhausted and the judge has decreed the opening of an oral trial, something that the Provincial Court already ordered three months ago and is no longer appealable.

Both the prosecutor What Juan Gonzalo Ospina attorney for the private prosecution, had requested that the trial be held, while the State Attorney and the defense attorneys requested free acquittal. one of the arguments

The accused agents, for their part, always maintained that their actions were legal. One of the arguments of the Interior and of the defendants themselves is that it was not an entry into a private home, but into a tourist floor where a crime was being committed.

Ospina, in his indictment, on the other hand, argues that “none of the six [agentes] he considered waiting for the attendees to leave the house, or, if applicable, go to the Plaza Castilla Guard Court, which is open 24 hours precisely to deal with emergency situations.” The lawyer also argues that the police officers they have sufficient training to know that such action was not legal.

He also says that his client does not understand Spanish well (he is British) and was scared when he saw the agents call his house. In addition, he explains that the flat was his home, that had rented for a year, and therefore it was not a tourist flat.

As for the disobedience of not being identified, the accusation says that it is not a crime, but an administrative fault. The core of the complaint, in any case, is that the Constitution considers the home inviolable without a court order, except in case of flagrante delicto, something that was not being committed at that time.

The request of the accusation is four years in prison for the police officers for a crime of trespassing and another of damages, in addition to compensation.

Already last March, it was published that the Prosecutor’s Office considered that a “reckless” raid had been committed, a figure that does not exist in the penal code, Therefore, the sub-inspector who ordered the door to be thrown down was not sorry. Regarding the other agents, the Public Ministry requested that the complete exemption from acting in the performance of duty.

Disclaimer: If you need to update/edit/remove this news or article then please contact our support team Learn more

J. A. Allen

Author, blogger, freelance writer. Hater of spiders. Drinker of wine. Mother of hellions.