Carlos Morales "influence peddling" investigation - June 2009


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I sincerely hope some of the press are printing things that have not happened. Thanks, Beltraneja, for explaining how the law works in Spain. It´s an awful idea to have a person found guilty before even a trial!
 
Beltraneja, in post No. 383 "sgl" has an English translation of the Billed-Bladet article you mention in your post No. 391!
I can´t find any accusation of Ex-Queen Anne-Marie
 
I refer to the title of the news. The Queen of Greece has nothing with the facts, but her name is in the title, it has not the name of Carlos Morales, it has the name of the Queen Anne Marie.

Billed-Bladet - Dronning Anne-Maries svigersøn risikerer fængsel

In my opinion,It should says the name of Carlos and
underneath of title, in the small letters,it should says that Carlos is husband of the Princess Alexia of Greece , daughter of the Ex Queen Anne Marie.
This is obvious, The journalist wants that the readers identify to the Queen with the case
 
I wonder if part of the problem of understanding what's going on is in the translation of the word "imputado." My guess is that it's related to the English word "impugn," which means to challenge as being false or wrong. Someone who is "impugned" would be questioned with a suggestion that they're wrong or guilty (not necessarily in a legal proceeding).

Being impugned (in English) doesn't suggest that you actually did something wrong or bad, just that someone is challenging you. For instance, if you said the dinner I cooked last night was horrible, I might say, "How dare you impugn my cooking?!?"

In that sense, I wonder if what the Spanish reports are saying is that Carlos has been questioned in connection with an ongoing case. That's not to say that he has been charged with any crime at all, or that he's suspected of doing anything wrong. Authorities are probably questioning every high-profile person with connections to the construction industry in Lanzarote.
 
:previous:
Exactly, it's like a person of interest in a criminal investigation in the United States. It's someone who the police are "investigating" as having a connection but who has not been charged by a judge. I think the Danish media are a bit too eager to throw him in the pond to have a new "scandal" in the royal family. I'm not convinced that the leaks are in any way accurate. Carlos could simply be providing evidence on others. Only the judge knows for sure.

The Danish report is simply calling him "Queen Anne-Marie's Son-in-law". It's a way to tie what's going on to her and the Danish Royals to hype it up. It's also a way to identify him because, let's be honest, he's not as famous as some of the other royal spouses.

For those who haven't seen it, Carlos was recently photographed by a Spanish Photographer. The pictures are pretty good. You have to click on the photos in the blog to see the whole set, including unused photos. http://www.davidseri.com/2009/04/carlos-morales-arquitecto.html There are some charming pictures in his office that show he has his children's drawings on the wall.
 
Last edited:
:previous:
Exactly, it's like a person of interest in a criminal investigation in the United States. It's someone who the police are "investigating" as having a connection but who has not been charged by a judge.

I think we should be careful using the term "person of interest." That's a term the media throws around, typically to mean a "suspect." It really doesn't have any specific legal meaning (in the United States at least) -- it's just a phase the police and media use when they don't want to use anything more specific.

When someone goes in for questioning, it may mean that they have information related to an investigation, but aren't guilty of anything. This could well be that kind of situation.

I'd hate to see anyone's character and reputation damaged by discussions like this using terms incorrectly, especially when things get lost in translation, when we don't have any actual facts, and when each county's legal system is so complicated and different.
 
I wonder if part of the problem of understanding what's going on is in the translation of the word "imputado." My guess is that it's related to the English word "impugn," which means to challenge as being false or wrong. Someone who is "impugned" would be questioned with a suggestion that they're wrong or guilty (not necessarily in a legal proceeding).

You have the basic meaning right (I'm a native Spanish speaker), but you don't have to get as far away from the cognate as you did, given that the word "impute" also exists in English and does not mean the same as "impugn," which is "impugnar" in Spanish.

Speaking colloquially in English, we might say that "imputado" can be translated as "accused." However, as Warren has posted above (#373), there is a difference in Spanish law between being "imputado" and "acusado." The difference reflects something akin to the difference between a regular trial in the United States and what happens in a Grand Jury, which hands down an indictment after conducting an investigation. As you know, when someone has been "indicted," it's more serious than having been merely "accused."

The confusion comes perhaps because the more serious term in Spanish is "acusado," whereas "accused" is the lesser one in English.

To sum up, "imputado" in Spain = "accused" in the U.S. system, and
"acusado" in Spain = "indicted" in the U.S.
 
I understand why the title of the article in the Danish magazine would be frustrating, but I believe that the writers did it because Danes may not know his name off-hand. They wanted to sell magazines, and what sells magazines more than a familiar person being linked with a crime?. Reporters often tend to overlook small but very important details, such as Queen Anne Marie's lack of involvement in anything, and the fact that Carlos Morales has NOT been arrested or found guilty. They are just like every other magazine of this style-trying to grab the reader's attention with dramatic headlines. I understand Beltraneja's frustration, and I truly hope that if he is innocent, that he is completely cleared of these accusations. If he is guilty, then he should be punished just as anyone else would be punished in the same situation.
 
You have the basic meaning right (I'm a native Spanish speaker), but you don't have to get as far away from the cognate as you did, given that the word "impute" also exists in English and does not mean the same as "impugn," which is "impugnar" in Spanish.

I typically think of "impute" being more a synonym for "attribute," without a negative connotation -- why I jumped to impugned -- but you're perfectly right.

Speaking colloquially in English, we might say that "imputado" can be translated as "accused." However, as Warren has posted above (#373), there is a difference in Spanish law between being "imputado" and "acusado."

Thank you for pointing that post out -- somehow I missed it the first time around. From that, it sounds like Carlos' problems may be a bit more serious than I thought.

Sounds like we'd say in English, "He's a suspect in a corruption case, who was called in for questioning by the police."

(Of course, regardless of the right word, he still is presumed innocent...)
 
I've been reading the newspaper of the Canary Islands and I have surprised ... Carlos Morales has given statement to the police, but he has not testified before the Judge Instructe.
The Judge is who decree the status of "IMPUTADO"..... It is still in the initial phase of the investigation, the investigating judge has not acted yet, Carlos can not have the status "imputado" because he has not given statement to the Judge...The police can not decree the status "imputado".It is posible that he could have give statement to the Judge...but the journalists can not based on the give statement to the police for say that he is "imputado", beacuse the police can not decree it...Only Judge.

I agree with Sgl.


 
I think that the truth of the matter will only come out in an official statement of some kind.
 
This afternoon, Carlos has given statement before the judge instructions, the judge has declared his status as "IMPUTADO", that is not "accused". We have to wait to "Auto" (it is a resolution of Judge Instructions).The "Auto" is the phase end of the investigation, it establishs the status of "Accused".
If the "Auto" gives the status of "accused" will hold a trial, public trial, with lawyers, witness.... and this Judge will say whether he is guilty or innocent.
Since this afternoon, and not before, he has the status of "imputado", it is obvious the journalists had violated his presumption of innocence.

When I speak of "Judge Instructions" he is a judge who only investigates ... and at the end of his work makes a resolution that concedes or no... the status of "accused", it is "Auto"

The Judge to decree if a accused is innocent or guilty is diferent
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In an article in German language on Page not found : Kanaren Nachrichten und Informationen from June 20th it´s said that he´s now officially accused of corruption and that they even have a permission now to search his private house in Puerto Calero!:cool:

Forgot to explain:If you click on the link you have to find "Lanzarote" in the row above (the canary islands are listed there) - but the article is in German
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can Anyone confirm that he was officially charged or that his status has changed to "Auto"?
 

Twenty-one people, including politicians and businessmen, have already been arrested since last month in the island of Lanzarote for alleged involvement in the affair, in which prosecutors say kickbacks were paid for municipal contracts.

Kind of sounds like it was "business as usual" for this to be done.
 
Can Anyone confirm that he was officially charged or that his status has changed to "Auto"?

A simple diagram of the Spanish criminal proceedings.

Imageshack - elesquemah.jpg

The process is divided into two phases:
1-RESEARCH ("INSTRUCCION" in spanish)
2-THE TRIAL PUBLIC, with THE JUDGE, LAWYERS, WITNESSES ... so the parties must present evidence of the facts, it ends with a sentence.
Not all "IMPUTADOS" are "ACCUSED", so in the "AUTO DE CONCLUSION DE LA INSTRUCCION", Judge examines evidence found, and if he finds that they are insufficient or no evidence of this, the "IMPUTADO" will not be accused of anything ... This will also establish the type of crime that could have commit..This indictment

In the red the position current Carlos.

HE IS NOT "ACUSSED" still.

ACUSSED is in spanish "ACUSADO"
 
I hope this matter will be cleared up soon, especially for the sake of Carlos´lovely family.
 
I agree with you, but the Spanish justice is very slow. I think that slow causes damage to the reputation of the person.This is unfair.

I think, in the end will not be formally accused with a crime by construct in a place in which not it can....because the judge investigating the case has not taken any measure against him or against his property(he has his passport!!!...He can travel freely), this is a very good sign because it means that the tests are very few , in conclusion, I think that he will not be formally accused.It is my opinio..
 
Thanks, Beltraneja, for giving us some information. I sincerely hope all will be fine with this family.
 
Are there any news from the Spanish papers about Carlos's problems with the Justice department? I have not seen anything about it lately.
BTW They both look lovely.
 
Looks as if Carlos´ influence peddling involvement isn´t as serious as it seemed in the beginning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i agree with you,I think it is not as serious as we thought initially, I think this, from that he traveled to Greece this summer to spend his holidays,
 
I´d like to ask the administrator to close this thread because there is every indication IMO that Carlos´ involvement isn´t as serious as supposed in the beginning. I don´t think there will be any further reports.
 
I´d like to ask the administrator to close this thread because there is every indication IMO that Carlos´ involvement isn´t as serious as supposed in the beginning. I don´t think there will be any further reports.
Has the investigation been completed, and if so, what was the outcome?
 
:previous: Mr Morales was identified as a "Person of interest" as late as June 2009. The investigation is still open.
For the sake of fairness and transparency I believe the fair thing to do is wait for the outcome of the investigation.
Closing the thread may seem like an attempt to sweep it under the carpet.
When a person so close to the King and Queen is under a cloud (fairly or unfairly) it is owed to them to allow him to defend and clear himself of all suspicion.
I pray and hope all will be cleared soon and this will just be a bad memory.:flowers:
 
:previous:
The thread will remain open until the investigation is concluded and the resulting legal actions, if any, are finalised.

Warren
Greek Royal Family moderator
 
Over on "Opiniones sobre la realeza"-message board there seem to be news about Carlos´ entanglement into corruption. Can someone please make a summary since it is in spanish. Doesn´t sound good to me....:sad:
 
I do not find the story in the newspaper, Where have you found it? I don´t find the link .
 
Back
Top Bottom