Pompeyo G. will not get out of prison. The National Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the defendant for sending six explosive letters to the Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, and the Ukrainian embassy, among others, in the midst of this country’s war with Russia. The Criminal Chamber considers that the retiree should remain in jail due to the risk of committing a crime again.
The police operation that was baptized as “Konvert” (“on” in Ukrainian) and that ended with the arrest of Pompeyo G. was precipitated, as this newspaper reported, because the General Information Commissariat considered that there was a risk that this ex-functionary of the Vitoria City Council (who worked as an undertaker) to undertake more shipments again. Now, a document from the Second Section of the Criminal Chamber of the National Court for which the defendant is kept in prison confirms this: «The existence in the home registry of more elements suitable for the elaboration of other artifacts also leaves the door open to the possible will of the subject to continue with the actions initiated».
The Investigating Court number 4 of the body, whose head is José Luis Calama, decided to send the man to prison for risk of escape and repeat criminality. In light of what was found in the search of his house, it was determined that he could attack again: visits to web pages for weapons and chemical products, purchase of DIY items and screws, etc.
The defendant’s lawyer pointed out in his appeal that there is no direct proof of having committed the acts with which he is accused and that, in addition, there is pending expert evidence on the elements found in his home and his aptitude for making explosive devices. . In addition, he denies that there is a risk of flight or of committing a crime again due to the “economic and family roots of the person under investigation” which, he says, “blurs the potential risk.” “The requirements of strict necessity, subsidiarity and proportionality required by constitutional doctrine to adopt such a measure do not meet,” says the lawyer on the prison.
That is why he proposes the setting of a bond or that the prison be exchanged for the delivery of his passport and biweekly appearances in court.
The Criminal Chamber, however, has a totally opposite position and points out that having examined all the documents that appear in the case, there are “sufficient indications of the appellant’s involvement in the facts”. In addition, the fact that the retiree lives in Spain does not reduce the risk of flight “given the seriousness of the penalty assigned,” the togados point out.
Pompeyo G. is accused of four crimes of terrorism, including one of using explosive, flammable or incendiary devices for terrorist purposes. He faces 20 years in prison.
The letters were sent between the end of November and the beginning of December, specifically, on the 24th of the first month, they were addressed to the President of the Government; on the 30th, to the Ukrainian embassy in Madrid; to the facilities of the company Instalaza SA, which manufactures weapons in Zaragoza; and on December 1 to the Defense Minister, Margarita Robles, to the United States embassy in Madrid and to the Satellite Center of the Torrejón Air Base. In total six envelopes of which only one (the one from the Ukrainian embassy) exploded when he was thrown by the security guard Mykola Velychko, realizing that it could be an explosive device, causing him minor injuries.
All the packages with the same characteristics were thoroughly analyzed by the agents who took advantage of the opportunity that some were intact (such as the one from the United States embassy) to be able to inspect the details.
The magistrates express that “the purchases made through Internet platforms” and the “finding of DNA traces in the packages received, coinciding with those found in waste bags collected near the residence of the person investigated”, are forceful elements of charge against Pompey G.
“All these data […] they constitute a sufficient indicative basis for the provisional attribution to the appellant of the authorship of said facts”, says the rapporteur Teresa García Quesada.