The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > Royal Family of Spain > Infanta Cristina, Iñaki Urdangarín and Family

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #121  
Old 01-03-2016, 06:40 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Martinsburg, United States
Posts: 196


Yes NotHRH, I am referring to the news article that DOM left for us to read. And I Thank you for your input. Over time and in reading news articles and seeing her actions as shown me that it seems that Infanta Cristina has not taken any responsibility for what has occurred in her life. IMO it seems like that Queen Letizia has been the one that the blame falls on for everything that takes place. King Philip and Queen Letizia are trying to protect the throne and the history of Spain and I think they are doing a wonderful job at this time. It is a hard struggle for them and they don't need nor should they have the drama of Infanta Cristina taking away from their duties.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 01-03-2016, 07:05 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Yes but my point remains: the sting has been removed from the bee (or the wasp, what you prefer). Of course she remains a King's daughter and King's sister, but with the new King the Infantas all have become almost invisible.
The Infantas are no longer members of the Royal House, so it is understandable that they no longer have public engagements on behalf of the King. It is regrettable though that Infanta Elena was also sidelined together with her now infamous sister, as she could still be quite valuable to the Royal House. As I understand, Queen Sofia still keeps a public agenda, but, otherwise, King Felipe and Queen Letizia have to do most of the work alone as King Juan Carlos is also becoming increasingly invisible and their daughters are still very young.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 01-03-2016, 07:13 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 15,838
I'm sure we'll be reading more delightful stories on the Borbons as the new year unfolds.
__________________
20th of December 1963,Birth of The Infanta Elena, Duchess of Lugo
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 01-03-2016, 08:01 AM
maria-olivia's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 3,691
Queen Sofia is the "joker" of the Royal House.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 01-03-2016, 09:37 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
All we can go by are press reports, specifically the one cited in Duke of Marmalade's post above. I am assuming this is SnowBirds' source for the comments she made in her post. Do you not believe the information in the article or do you know something we all do not, such as you heard the Infanta herself say the info the article is bogus and untrue? And if you did indeed hear HRH say the article is a lie, can you use her exact words, quoting when and where needed?
The only source should be the official communications from the Tribunal of Justice or the Office of the Attorney-General (Fiscalía General del Estado in Spanish). Not sensational media hypes.

Despite being a co-owner of the company Aizoon and being a member of the board of Nóos Institute (both organizatons involved in this case), Infanta Doña Cristina finally would not be prosecuted. The Tribunal of Justice in the case, as well the Prosecutor of the Balearic Isles, as well the Office of the Attorney-General agreed and maintain that, as is clear from the testimony of various accused people and showed by documents seized, that there is no indication that Infanta Doña Cristina participated in the activities or the management of the companies involved or was involved in the core decisionmaking. For these same reasons, the Attorney General's Office rejected a private complaint filed against the Infanta by a lawyer.

A certain and vigorously active Judge of Instruction kept going on against the Infanta and finally she was heard in the procedure. The "blaming everything on someone else than herself" as some posters claim seem not funded by what has been recorded from the hearings:

Judge: Do you have legal knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you have tax knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you know about the PADRE program?
The Infanta: I heard about it, but no.
Judge: Do you have economic expertise?
The Infanta: No, very basic, but no.

The rest of the hearing went in that pattern. She blamed no one at all. Not Mr Diego Torres, not anyone else of the nine accused. She blamed no one. Things seem to get an own life on this forum which are not very corresponding to reality.

Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:29 AM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by An Ard Ri View Post
I'm sure we'll be reading more delightful stories on the Borbons as the new year unfolds.
Oh, I'm sure!!
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 01-03-2016, 12:57 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The only source should be the official communications from the Tribunal of Justice or the Office of the Attorney-General (Fiscalía General del Estado in Spanish). Not sensational media hypes.

Despite being a co-owner of the company Aizoon and being a member of the board of Nóos Institute (both organizatons involved in this case), Infanta Doña Cristina finally would not be prosecuted. The Tribunal of Justice in the case, as well the Prosecutor of the Balearic Isles, as well the Office of the Attorney-General agreed and maintain that, as is clear from the testimony of various accused people and showed by documents seized, that there is no indication that Infanta Doña Cristina participated in the activities or the management of the companies involved or was involved in the core decisionmaking. For these same reasons, the Attorney General's Office rejected a private complaint filed against the Infanta by a lawyer.

A certain and vigorously active Judge of Instruction kept going on against the Infanta and finally she was heard in the procedure. The "blaming everything on someone else than herself" as some posters claim seem not funded by what has been recorded from the hearings:

Judge: Do you have legal knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you have tax knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you know about the PADRE program?
The Infanta: I heard about it, but no.
Judge: Do you have economic expertise?
The Infanta: No, very basic, but no.

The rest of the hearing went in that pattern. She blamed no one at all. Not Mr Diego Torres, not anyone else of the nine accused. She blamed no one. Things seem to get an own life on this forum which are not very corresponding to reality.

Understood - there is only one official journal and the rest of the stories are in the tabloids, headlined for public consumption. I cannot understand how Cristina, a person with no legal knowledge, no tax knowledge, and no economic expertise could allow herself to become a member of the board of the NOOS Institute or any other business-type board. If it is clear from her testimony and the testimony of others implicated that she had no core role in any of the decision-making, then she and only she, through her own naivete and ignorance, can blame only herself for all the fingers pointing her way by the Spanish public and the decisions, by her brother, to make her an outcast, publicly anyway, of the Spanish royal family. The fact that she now lives in Switzerland, where money that needs to be hidden can be, does nothing but make her "appear" to be guilty of all that she is accused. Yes, the entire story has taken a life on its own, courtesy of HRH Infanta Cristina of Spain herself.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 01-03-2016, 01:21 PM
lula's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: , Spain
Posts: 18,194
The poor ignorant wife is the defense strategy of her lawyers ... but nobody believes it.

Infanta Cristina has a degree in Political Science, she has a Master in International Relations... for 20 years she has worked in a cultural and social foundation that belongs to one of the largest banks in Spain... and has access to the best consultants.

If she did not know what was happening, it is because she did not want to know. She preferred to think that her husband was a brilliant entrepreneur who made a lot of money and not ask questions.

But possibly Cristina, in the end, will did not suffer any consequences, because the Treasury has not denounced her and Botin doctrine will be applied. Something that is a scandal for the Spanish people, because in recent months the Treasury has been very hard not only with normal citizens, but also with many famous people such as athletes, artists and singers.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 01-03-2016, 01:57 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,923
The Infanta Doña Cristina had "profit" because her husband -who for sure is involved- earned money in these constructions. Money which befitted his royal spouse and his children. But what Iñaki did, on a relatively little scale, was what everybody else of the ruling elite was doing. Even the Catalan President and front fighter for a separation from "the corrupt Government in Madrid", Mr Artur Mas, is up to his neck in corruption scandals himself....

The "creative use" of public money was nothing new and all Spaniards knew it. All of them. And most of these Spaniards themselves have had profit from it too... So it was tolerated in society as something which was inevitable. The people became extremely angry when draconic measure after draconic measure came over them in the deep crisis which had hit Spain. What was a better and more ideal object for all frustrations than an Infanta de España, even when it turns out that ultimately it all seems quite minimal from her side.

Now Spain is recovering again from the economic crisis and all these automatisms ("You do something for me, I do something for you") are still there. They have always been there. Simply look at the football (soccer) clubs. Up to their neck in the debts but purchasing players for unbelievable amounts. All supporters knowing that -otherwise it is impossible- financial malversations are daily business in those clubs but all pretend not to see the truth. Even absolute and undisputed stars as Lionel Messi and Neymar are tarnished with tax fraud or tax evasions. The Spaniard Rodrigo Rato, a former head of IMF who is up to his neck in fraud. The fall of the giants Bankia and Caja Madrid allowing senior executives and advisers to use “phantom” corporate credit cards to go on a €30 million private spending spree....

Then Infanta Doña Cristina comes handy as lightning rod, as a modern Santa María Magdalena for the Spanish elite to take the attention away. What where her crimes? She bought a dress for her daughter and payed it with a Noos Credit Card? Pfffftttt....
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 01-03-2016, 01:59 PM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 11,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Judge: Do you have legal knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you have tax knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you know about the PADRE program?
The Infanta: I heard about it, but no.
Judge: Do you have economic expertise?
The Infanta: No, very basic, but no.
Nobody can believe this statement from a well educated woman like Cristina.

‘Botín doctrine’ means that a ‘popular accusation’ (when the plaintiff bringing the action to court is not the direct victim of the alleged crime but is defending rights on behalf of the people) is insufficient to sustain a case when there is no public prosecution.
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 01-03-2016, 02:02 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,923
Well I am a developed person but in all honesty I can say that I have no legal knowledge (that is why we hire lawyers), that I have no tax knowledge (that is why we hire accountants), that I may have heard something about certain programs but don't ask me for details and that I have no economic expertise either (that is why we hire financial consultants).

Either I am weird, like the Infanta. Or we simply share a lot of general knowledge and a little of specific knowledge, like zillions of others.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 01-03-2016, 02:20 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The only source should be the official communications from the Tribunal of Justice or the Office of the Attorney-General (Fiscalía General del Estado in Spanish). Not sensational media hypes.

Despite being a co-owner of the company Aizoon and being a member of the board of Nóos Institute (both organizatons involved in this case), Infanta Doña Cristina finally would not be prosecuted. The Tribunal of Justice in the case, as well the Prosecutor of the Balearic Isles, as well the Office of the Attorney-General agreed and maintain that, as is clear from the testimony of various accused people and showed by documents seized, that there is no indication that Infanta Doña Cristina participated in the activities or the management of the companies involved or was involved in the core decisionmaking. For these same reasons, the Attorney General's Office rejected a private complaint filed against the Infanta by a lawyer.

A certain and vigorously active Judge of Instruction kept going on against the Infanta and finally she was heard in the procedure. The "blaming everything on someone else than herself" as some posters claim seem not funded by what has been recorded from the hearings:

Judge: Do you have legal knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you have tax knowledge?
The Infanta: No.
Judge: Do you know about the PADRE program?
The Infanta: I heard about it, but no.
Judge: Do you have economic expertise?
The Infanta: No, very basic, but no.

The rest of the hearing went in that pattern. She blamed no one at all. Not Mr Diego Torres, not anyone else of the nine accused. She blamed no one. Things seem to get an own life on this forum which are not very corresponding to reality.

If these were the type questions put to the Infanta then the questioning was very inept at best. There were no answers other than "no" she could answer truthfully, unless she is a lawyer, tax expert or economist.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 01-03-2016, 02:23 PM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 11,557
The fact that she sat on the board of Noos makes her statement totally incredible.
How can you sit on a board and not know basic things about what they are doing?
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 01-03-2016, 05:01 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Well I am a developed person but in all honesty I can say that I have no legal knowledge (that is why we hire lawyers), that I have no tax knowledge (that is why we hire accountants), that I may have heard something about certain programs but don't ask me for details and that I have no economic expertise either (that is why we hire financial consultants).

Either I am weird, like the Infanta. Or we simply share a lot of general knowledge and a little of specific knowledge, like zillions of others.
So why was she on the board to begin with, what skills/qualities did she contribute? According to her, none. She would have been wise to hire lawyers, accountants, and financial consultants and let these professionals take care of matters of the board. Anyway, fact remains she was unqualified to be on the board and was anyway - basically she was the front person behind which suspicious activity was on-going. She says she did not know, but why else put a person with no qualifications on the NOOS board? No she really can't be that stupid...she really can't be...
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 01-03-2016, 05:13 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,644
Just perhaps she felt comfortable being on the board knowing that she had complete trust in her husband and between them, they were guaranteed two votes for whatever the board would be deciding on.

When it comes to financial dealings and just about anything involving money, I totally trust my husband's judgment to advise me on things because he's actually good at what he does and can squeeze a quarter out of a nickel sometimes when we need it. We're not on any kind of board but we're jointly involved in all thing financial.

I'm going to refrain from voicing on whether Christina is guilty or innocent and leave that up to the courts.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 01-03-2016, 11:01 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
So why was she on the board to begin with, what skills/qualities did she contribute? According to her, none. She would have been wise to hire lawyers, accountants, and financial consultants and let these professionals take care of matters of the board. Anyway, fact remains she was unqualified to be on the board and was anyway - basically she was the front person behind which suspicious activity was on-going. She says she did not know, but why else put a person with no qualifications on the NOOS board? No she really can't be that stupid...she really can't be...
I agree with you. I am not familiar with the responsibilities of corporate boards in Spain but in the US the board is the responsible party who in turn hires the CEO to carry out its directions. But the ultimate responsibility lies with the board. If the Infanta did not understand what was going on then it is just ...tough luck for her.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 01-03-2016, 11:50 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by grevinnan View Post
I agree with you. I am not familiar with the responsibilities of corporate boards in Spain but in the US the board is the responsible party who in turn hires the CEO to carry out its directions. But the ultimate responsibility lies with the board. If the Infanta did not understand what was going on then it is just ...tough luck for her.
In the US it's not uncommon for people to become board members based on who they are and who they know, instead of what they know. The link below is a quick but interesting read.. soft landings indeed! I doubt things are that different in Spain.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/06/...e-boards/?_r=0

That doesn't mean that if things go south the prestige board members bear no responsibility for the fallout, as Christina is now finding out. But Christina's claim that she knew very little about the day to day running of the board and relied on Inaki to make the actual decisions doesn't seem unbelievable in light of articles like the above and the many others that can be found with a single internet search.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 01-04-2016, 04:11 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 11,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The Infanta Doña Cristina had "profit" because her husband -who for sure is involved- earned money in these constructions. Money which befitted his royal spouse and his children. But what Iñaki did, on a relatively little scale, was what everybody else of the ruling elite was doing. Even the Catalan President and front fighter for a separation from "the corrupt Government in Madrid", Mr Artur Mas, is up to his neck in corruption scandals himself....

The "creative use" of public money was nothing new and all Spaniards knew it. All of them. And most of these Spaniards themselves have had profit from it too... So it was tolerated in society as something which was inevitable. The people became extremely angry when draconic measure after draconic measure came over them in the deep crisis which had hit Spain. What was a better and more ideal object for all frustrations than an Infanta de España, even when it turns out that ultimately it all seems quite minimal from her side.

Now Spain is recovering again from the economic crisis and all these automatisms ("You do something for me, I do something for you") are still there. They have always been there. Simply look at the football (soccer) clubs. Up to their neck in the debts but purchasing players for unbelievable amounts. All supporters knowing that -otherwise it is impossible- financial malversations are daily business in those clubs but all pretend not to see the truth. Even absolute and undisputed stars as Lionel Messi and Neymar are tarnished with tax fraud or tax evasions. The Spaniard Rodrigo Rato, a former head of IMF who is up to his neck in fraud. The fall of the giants Bankia and Caja Madrid allowing senior executives and advisers to use “phantom” corporate credit cards to go on a €30 million private spending spree....

Then Infanta Doña Cristina comes handy as lightning rod, as a modern Santa María Magdalena for the Spanish elite to take the attention away. What where her crimes? She bought a dress for her daughter and payed it with a Noos Credit Card? Pfffftttt....
All of what you stated above is correct BUT

given the 'above everything' image of the SRF, especially King Juan Carlos, all alarm bells should have gone off with the thought of a royal getting his fingers on public money.

And it seems that at the beginning, JC wanted Inaki elsewhere, got him a job with Laureus, but 200.000 Euros per year salary wasnt good enough. And because Inaki wanted to make more money on his own and JC did not see a way to keep him from doing so, all of this started.

I am sure the mess about to happen was well known within the family but they were either to weak to stop it or though it would be ok because of the common acceptance of misuse of public money.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 01-04-2016, 02:27 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
In the US it's not uncommon for people to become board members based on who they are and who they know, instead of what they know. The link below is a quick but interesting read.. soft landings indeed! I doubt things are that different in Spain.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/06/...e-boards/?_r=0

That doesn't mean that if things go south the prestige board members bear no responsibility for the fallout, as Christina is now finding out. But Christina's claim that she knew very little about the day to day running of the board and relied on Inaki to make the actual decisions doesn't seem unbelievable in light of articles like the above and the many others that can be found with a single internet search.
The people discussed in the article are well educated and have held professional and political positions that would be appropriate backgrounds for board memberships. The article does not discuss suitability but rather the opportunities that are available for retiring politicians.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 01-04-2016, 02:38 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 15,838
Monday 11 January looms for the Infanta Cristina

La cuenta atrás de la Infanta Cristina para sentarse en el banquillo de los acusados tras su Navidad más triste - Bekia

https://translate.google.ie/translat...-text=&act=url
__________________

__________________
20th of December 1963,Birth of The Infanta Elena, Duchess of Lugo
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
controversy, corruption, cristina, duchess of palma, iñaki, iñaki urdangarín, infanta cristina, palma, palma de mallorca, scandal


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Iñaki, Cristina and the NOOS Corruption Investigation Part 1 (2011-2014) LadyFinn Infanta Cristina, Iñaki Urdangarín and Family 1765 01-04-2015 10:24 AM
Infanta Cristina & Iñaki Urdangarín Picture Thread, Part 2 (May 2006 - February 2007) Elsa M. Infanta Cristina, Iñaki Urdangarín and Family 194 02-24-2007 07:10 AM
Infanta Cristina & Iñaki Urdangarín Picture Thread, Part 1 (Sept. 2005 - May 2006) Anna_R Infanta Cristina, Iñaki Urdangarín and Family 196 05-15-2006 07:39 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece haakon kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander madeleine member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess stéphanie's daytime outfits queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 sheikh hamdan bin mohammed state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:23 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises