The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Infanta Cristina, Iñaki Urdangarín and Family (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f117/)
-   -   Iñaki, Cristina and the NOOS Corruption Investigation Part 2 (2015 - 2018) (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f117/i-aki-cristina-and-the-noos-corruption-investigation-part-2-2015-2018-a-37941.html)

tamta 01-29-2016 09:00 PM

I feel bad for Queen Sofia, above all else at this moment.. It must be really painful for her to see her own child becoming an outcast of the family and a cause for scandal -most likely without the princess having a responsibility as that attributed to her.. As proud as she might feel for Felipe, so worried and in pain she probably feels for Christina..

HRHHermione 01-29-2016 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamta (Post 1859956)
I feel bad for Queen Sofia, above all else at this moment.. It must be really painful for her to see her own child becoming an outcast of the family and a cause for scandal -most likely without the princess having a responsibility as that attributed to her.. As proud as she might feel for Felipe, so worried and in pain she probably feels for Christina..

What makes you convinced of Cristina's innocence?

Alondra 01-30-2016 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnaC (Post 1859828)
The same thing happens in Spain Sancia.
In this case is not that the judges have decided not to apply the Botin doctrine to make an example of Cristina for being who she is, they've decided that the doctrine is not applicable in her case because the crime exits (Urdangarín is accused of it by the prosecutor and the state attorney) and she's an accessory. They've released a 30 page technical report to explain their reasoning, and it's not the first time a judge or panel of judges has considered that the Botín doctrine is not applicable to a similar case.

Basically the judges found that the doctrine is not applicable as both Hacienda y Agencia Tributaria (Social Security and Tax/IRS departments) admitted that Cristina had committed an offence by omitting revenue from her tax return. Admission of a tax offense invalidates the Botin's doctrine.

The maximum she's looking at is 8 years but this won't happen. NOT because she's an Infanta but because taking into consideration the amount of money defaulted from Social Security (less than 500,000 euros) and Cristina having no previous criminal record, Spanish justice is likely to hand over the standard 2 year sentence not spent in jail.

However......she's already persona non grata in Spain and having a criminal record will make her more of a pariah than she's already. Cristina could have apologised and said sorry. She didn't.

Acts=consequences. She's earned them.

sjetajiem 01-30-2016 04:47 AM

For sure she will get a jail sentence. She did not show any remorse for what she did so that can not be taken in consideration by the judges and I would not be surprised if she gets the maximum.

Isabel Pantoja got a jail sentence a few years ago (which she spends in jail actually) and she had no previous criminal record before.
An amount of money defaulted from the state (Social Security) is a heavy crime.

Duc_et_Pair 01-30-2016 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alondra (Post 1859988)
Basically the judges found that the doctrine is not applicable as both Hacienda y Agencia Tributaria (Social Security and Tax/IRS departments) admitted that Cristina had committed an offence by omitting revenue from her tax return. Admission of a tax offense invalidates the Botin's doctrine.

The maximum she's looking at is 8 years but this won't happen. NOT because she's an Infanta but because taking into consideration the amount of money defaulted from Social Security (less than 500,000 euros) and Cristina having no previous criminal record, Spanish justice is likely to hand over the standard 2 year sentence not spent in jail.

However......she's already persona non grata in Spain and having a criminal record will make her more of a pariah than she's already. Cristina could have apologised and said sorry. She didn't.

Acts=consequences. She's earned them.

I agree with you that it is most unlikely that Infanta Doña Cristina will have to go into jail. The alleged crime is too small for jail. Then having to say sorry: that also means that you acknowledge wrongdoing and the Infanta (and her legal team) have categorically denied any wrongdoing at all. So saying sorry is contradicting her strategy. And when a suspect of an alleged crime or misdemeaour finds he/she has nothing to blame for, that is also a position someone may hold in a lawsuit.

Winnie 01-30-2016 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamta (Post 1859956)
I feel bad for Queen Sofia, above all else at this moment.. It must be really painful for her to see her own child becoming an outcast of the family and a cause for scandal -most likely without the princess having a responsibility as that attributed to her.. As proud as she might feel for Felipe, so worried and in pain she probably feels for Christina..

I too have always felt sorry for Queen Sofia. After years of having her flagrant adulterer husband's self-centered antics to live with now her child is going to court in an awful public trial. This sweet woman is lucky to have a strong faith. She will pull through this with head held high and do exactly what is correct for family and chosen country. I admire her for the strong woman she is and hope that the media and later history treats her kindly.

Sancia 01-30-2016 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnaC (Post 1859828)
The same thing happens in Spain Sancia.
In this case is not that the judges have decided not to apply the Botin doctrine to make an example of Cristina for being who she is, they've decided that the doctrine is not applicable in her case because the crime exits (Urdangarín is accused of it by the prosecutor and the state attorney) and she's an accessory. They've released a 30 page technical report to explain their reasoning, and it's not the first time a judge or panel of judges has considered that the Botín doctrine is not applicable to a similar case.

Thanks for the explanation.

vkrish 01-30-2016 04:39 PM

I dont think there is much need to feel sorry for Queen Sophia. As a mother and Queen consort, she must have got wind of this many many years ago.. She is as much responsible as JC for letting this happen (if at all he is). Maybe she thought it will just pass away, as do many other unpleasant things in many other places and families.
But all bad times struck once. And i am sure she is strong enough to endure this.

GracieGiraffe 01-31-2016 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vkrish (Post 1860143)
I dont think there is much need to feel sorry for Queen Sophia. As a mother and Queen consort, she must have got wind of this many many years ago.. She is as much responsible as JC for letting this happen (if at all he is). Maybe she thought it will just pass away, as do many other unpleasant things in many other places and families.
But all bad times struck once. And i am sure she is strong enough to endure this.

I'm not sure what Sofia was going to do to stop her adult daughter and son-in-law. She was not the monarch, I doubt she had any power or control over Cristina in any way.

As for whether I need to feel sorry for her, well, I do. I'd feel sorry for any mother who is no doubt worried sick about her daughter and her grandchildren who are going through all this.

Countessmeout 01-31-2016 12:48 AM

I have to agree Gracie. To blame a parent, even a monarch/consort, for the bad choices/mistakes their children made is wrong. Cristina is a grown woman, she and her husband knew fully what they were doing and how wrong it was, and made the choices themselves. There is no reason to think that the royal couple knew or encouraged such actions.

I can find great sympathy for Sofia. Her marriage certainly hasn't been an easy one. She has dealt with her husband, and focussed on her kids and her role as queen of Spain. And now she is facing watching her daughter go through a trial and likely watching her grandchildren who she is very close to, going through all of this.

tamta 01-31-2016 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRHHermione (Post 1859960)
What makes you convinced of Cristina's innocence?

I said "most likely".. I'm not convinced, but that's my take on things.

carlota 01-31-2016 05:33 PM

mother's don't have responsibility over their adult children's choices, that's for sure. however, cristina is an integral part of an institution which represents a country and for which its citizens pay their taxes to to upkeep what they represent. they count with enormous privileges and as such, the degree of responsibility associated is higher than for normal families. as such, sofia is no ordinary mother. acting blindly when seeing such behaviour taking place, when you are the consort of the head of state, is simply wrong. assuming that they knew what was happening, and accounts seem to indicate so, all this could have been avoided if JC and sofia had stood their ground and stopped this at its root. the prime responsible people were obviously cristina and inaki, but, for their own sake at least, JC and sofia should have intervened more decisively.

bertie5252003 02-01-2016 12:18 AM

I have read lots about this and though my Spanish is totally hopeless I have been keeping up to date .. I imagine it will all come out in the wash but all I can say is it is just really sad .. that's all ..

Duke of Marmalade 02-01-2016 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlota (Post 1860397)
mother's don't have responsibility over their adult children's choices, that's for sure. however, cristina is an integral part of an institution which represents a country and for which its citizens pay their taxes to to upkeep what they represent. they count with enormous privileges and as such, the degree of responsibility associated is higher than for normal families. as such, sofia is no ordinary mother. acting blindly when seeing such behaviour taking place, when you are the consort of the head of state, is simply wrong. assuming that they knew what was happening, and accounts seem to indicate so, all this could have been avoided if JC and sofia had stood their ground and stopped this at its root. the prime responsible people were obviously cristina and inaki, but, for their own sake at least, JC and sofia should have intervened more decisively.

I agree. Because of Inakis profession as a handballer, he was basically jobless after his professional career ended. JC had the responsibility to provide him with a suitable 'royal connections' job, what he tried (same with Jaime). Inaki turned down a 200.000 Euro job with Laureus because he thought that it wasn't enough. At this stage JC had to be alarmed and not let Inaki to get away with doing his own thing, especially not getting his hands on public money.
I think it was a mixture of JC being unable/unwilling to put his foot down, maybe to avoid angering his daughter claiming that Inaki somehow had to earn his living, stressing his willingness to work on his own, and Inaki being bold beyond anyone's imagination.
We can all see where it ended and yes, the royal house is guilty of this too, not only JC (he would have the actual power to put his foot down) but also Sofia and Felipe as CP because he would inherit the whole mess.
All of them still played happy family at Inakis birthday 2008, when Inaki's doing must have been well known within the family.

ladejesus 02-01-2016 08:06 AM

I have been reading all of the news as it comes up, and I must say, everything that I have read points to Casa Real not only knowing but helping with Iñaki's "business." The easiest way for King JC to put his foot down would have been to quietly let people know that working with his son-in-law was unacceptable. Iñaki would have been forced to stop without any contracts.

I am not saying we should blame Casa Real or KJC, I am just saying that we need to think about that as a legitimate possibility when we're tempted to bash Iñaki for being the scum of the universe.

Maybe growing up in a corrupt city has me jaded, but honestly, this case seems blown out of proportion and certainly not jail-worthy.

Duke of Marmalade 02-01-2016 09:09 AM

I think that the whole family was fully aware of Inaki's wrongdoings that could potentially be prosecuted in a court of law when they shipped the family out to Washington in 2009 on the type of golden job that Inaki should already have taken in 2002.

I believe that all of them, JC, Sofia, Felipe, the whole family and casa real, were aware of the situation and wanted him out of the country because they were getting cold feet. And I think the fact that Cristina and Inaki accepted the job/move to the US proves to me that even they were now aware that the whole situation could come back and hit the royal family like a boomerang, what happened in the end.

And if not for the financial crisis hitting Spain really really hard, all of them would have gotten away with it and the whole thing would have brushed under the carpet. But at some point the crisis became so bad and at the same time the King's influence starting waning, that nothing could be done anymore.

So of course first and foremost it's Inaki who got involved in immoral/criminal (though 'normal' at the time) business deals, Cristina to a lesser extend probably because she was besotted with Inaki and felt entitled (after all she has witnessed her family's rise to power and money that most likely wasn't squeaky clean either) but the rest of the family is equally guilty for not doing enough against it, hyprocracy and being delusional about their own position.

Probably some family members were quicker to understand than others (Felipe) others followed (JC) but some (Sofia) were still delusional when posing with Inaki when it was really really clear what was going to happen.

princess gertrude 02-01-2016 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade (Post 1860494)
I think that the whole family was fully aware of Inaki's wrongdoings that could potentially be prosecuted in a court of law when they shipped the family out to Washington in 2009 on the type of golden job that Inaki should already have taken in 2002.

I believe that all of them, JC, Sofia, Felipe, the whole family and casa real, were aware of the situation and wanted him out of the country because they were getting cold feet. And I think the fact that Cristina and Inaki accepted the job/move to the US proves to me that even they were now aware that the whole situation could come back and hit the royal family like a boomerang, what happened in the end.

And if not for the financial crisis hitting Spain really really hard, all of them would have gotten away with it and the whole thing would have brushed under the carpet. But at some point the crisis became so bad and at the same time the King's influence starting waning, that nothing could be done anymore.

So of course first and foremost it's Inaki who got involved in immoral/criminal (though 'normal' at the time) business deals, Cristina to a lesser extend probably because she was besotted with Inaki and felt entitled (after all she has witnessed her family's rise to power and money that most likely wasn't squeaky clean either) but the rest of the family is equally guilty for not doing enough against it, hyprocracy and being delusional about their own position.

Probably some family members were quicker to understand than others (Felipe) others followed (JC) but some (Sofia) were still delusional when posing with Inaki when it was really really clear what was going to happen.

I agree, I do think to some extent that Sofia & Felipe knew something was going on. I think JC knew quite a bit of what was going on, thus the job in DC. I have a feeling that when JC actually found out about everything (or at least the majority) he started to put his foot down, but it might have been a little late at that point. I really feel for Felipe, I'm sure that he had some knowledge of the situation, but until he became king had no authority to do anything about it.

PetticoatLane 02-02-2016 03:04 AM

I found this article in English which is a helpful summing up of the issue. It was written in 2014 so is somewhat outdated at this stage but was helpful for me in understanding the history of this.

For example, it states that Cristina would likely have been left out of this whole thing if Inaki had not gone after the wife of his former partner Diego Torres. The legal experts all thought that the wives should have been kept out of this and that Inaki should have agreed to that, but he and his lawyers chose not to, which made Cristina fair game.

Also, odd happenings with the Spanish intelligence agency and the judges in the case apparently being surveilled.

How a rumor grew into a royal scandal | In English | EL PAÍS

carlota 02-04-2016 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PetticoatLane (Post 1860643)
I found this article in English which is a helpful summing up of the issue. It was written in 2014 so is somewhat outdated at this stage but was helpful for me in understanding the history of this.

For example, it states that Cristina would likely have been left out of this whole thing if Inaki had not gone after the wife of his former partner Diego Torres. The legal experts all thought that the wives should have been kept out of this and that Inaki should have agreed to that, but he and his lawyers chose not to, which made Cristina fair game.

Also, odd happenings with the Spanish intelligence agency and the judges in the case apparently being surveilled.

How a rumor grew into a royal scandal | In English | EL PAÍS

very interesting, although from memory, diego torres wife was from moment 1 a suspect. it was in fact diego torres himself who complained about why was his wife a suspect if cristina wasn't. i guess back then her image was less tainted and no one could believe her being guilty, being this idyllic wife and mother. also, i think back then no one would have guessed that royalty would be judged - corruption in spain is such that lots of people, myself included, thought this would be 'slipped under the rug'.

lula 02-09-2016 04:50 AM

The trial begins

Video

Caso Nóos: Pepote, el primer arrepentido de Nóos: "Lo lógico era colaborar con la justicia, algunas actuaciones no fueron pulcras" | EL MUNDO

Photos

Caso Nóos: La infanta Cristina vuelve a sentarse en el banquillo tras reanudarse el juicio por el caso Nóos. Fotogalerías de Noticias


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises