The first session of the trial with the Tribunal of the Jury against Castillo was devoted, in its entirety, to the questions posed by the Public Ministry, the accusations and the defense. It should be remembered that the Prosecutor’s Office requests for Castillo eight years in prison, twenty years of disqualification as a civil servant or public position (he is already retired) and that he return more than 145,000 euros that he allegedly took out of the public company box for different personal interests.
Of that significant amount of money, more than 124,000 euros were placed in a type of accounting entry that, at the time of some audits, no longer appeared in the rules applicable to this practice. This is the Treasury account “578”, which the now investigated used by his own decision to divert some supposed promissory notes on which there was no longer any hope of collection by the insular public company. Regarding this section of the accusation, Castillo allegedly again pointed out or blamed Ignacio Pintado. In the words of the person implicated, the former manager told him that these promissory notes could not be diverted to “losses”, since they would generate such a negative accounting balance (more than 50 percent of the total) that it would have forced the disappearance of the Fairground company ; a reality that Pintado did not want, in Castillo’s opinion.
The controversial annotation
On that occasion, he admitted that the diversion to the controversial accounting entry was made by him, but by order of Pintado. Nor on that occasion did he ask the former manager for a written argument. According to the investigation carried out on the case, said promissory notes were not located. Castillo clarified that he was not in charge of filing such documents, but the other two people who were in his department.
This approach was used repeatedly when asked by the prosecutor, Jonay Socas; the attorney for the private prosecution (representing the Cabildo); the lawyer for the popular prosecution (on behalf of four island councilors of Podemos in the previous term of office), and the defense attorney.
Castillo explained that all his actions as the former head of Administration and Accounting were controlled by Pintado Mascareño. On two occasions, a Court of First Instance of Santa Cruz de Tenerife sent letters to the public entity dependent on the Insular Corporation so that a total of 510 euros was withdrawn from Castillo’s payroll each month to pay the alimony he was claiming for his children his ex-wife. In the investigation of the case it is clear that a good part of that money went, directly, from the account of the Recinto Ferial company to that of the ex-wife of the accused today.
Castillo assured that, for many years, he had financial difficulties and the monthly payment of those 510 euros would have been a serious damage to his financial stability, since he had to face various expenses. Castillo spoke about this inconvenience with the former manager of the Fairgrounds and it was he who decided that the amount of money be transferred directly from the public company account to that of the ex-wife, that the former head of Accounting was paying it and not communicate any of this to the consultancy in charge of preparing and managing the staff payroll. As already stated, Castillo insists that he returned all that money (11,222 euros), but he cannot provide papers that justify it and said that the person who knew and could confirm it was Pintado. He notes that the former manager “did not want my name to appear on a debt with the company.”
Cash vouchers
Another of the amounts for which Castillo Melo is accused amounts to 9,219 euros, based on the “cash vouchers” not destroyed found in his office. Again, the defendant said that he returned all that money, but that the vouchers were not broken. Regarding the 354 euros that he ordered a subordinate to enter the Santa Cruz de Tenerife City Council to pay the tax (IBI) of a house and a garage, as well as the circulation tax of a quad and a car, he explained that he received the pay notice when he was on vacation and then asked an employee to pay that amount to avoid surcharges. But Castillo insists that that amount was also returned.
The person implicated stated that, on several occasions, he warned the deceased former manager that “it was impossible and not recommended” for the Treasury and Accounting of the Fairgrounds to be managed by the same person (him), but regretted that Pintado never paid attention to such a recommendation.
As he explained to questions from the prosecutor, the defendant clarified that in the cash box there should always be 4,500 euros to meet extraordinary and urgent expenses. In addition, according to his statement, two other people who were under his orders, identified as Luna and Estrella, had the keys to access the cash that was in the box.
The two main sources of income for the island company were “the showmen” and “the box office.” The vast majority of vendors entered the rent of each stall through bank transfers. The most billed event was the Tenerife Children’s Park (PIT). Regarding the cash vouchers, according to Castillo, they were used to pay for food for maintenance personnel, screws or consumables, for example. But they were also taken out to pay for coffees or breakfasts from the Castle itself or from Pintado, according to the investigated. He indicated that, every three months, a financial audit (of the accounts) and another of compliance (on the management) were carried out.
The prohibition to enter his office
The person hired by the company of the Fairgrounds to replace Ignacio Castillo was a woman to whom he now involved gave all the treasury money at one time. The defendant retired in June 2016. He had joined the company in 1989, following a selection of personnel carried out at the Chamber of Commerce. He first worked as an administrative officer, until in 2005 he became head of Administration and Accounting. Shortly after leaving the work activity in the public society, he was informed by telephone that he could visit his colleagues to say goodbye, but in no case access his office again. In fact, the lock on that room was changed after a few days. In that enclosure, 73 “cash vouchers for personal use” were found. Ignacio Castillo recalled that the complaint for embezzlement was filed by Ignacio Pintado Mascareño three months after he retired. The defendant admits that he learned of the aforementioned situation on September 17, 2016 through the media and that, three days later, he went to the Prosecutor’s Office to provide the information he had. Ignacio Pintado was removed from his post a few days later. To questions from the Cabildo lawyer, Castillo pointed out that “the accounting decisions were made by the manager,” about whom he said that he allegedly had “a lot of laziness” to collect the promissory notes that totaled 124,000 euros. According to the person implicated, the bank transfers required the authorization of Pintado, of whom Castillo had the code to capture the digital signature. “I never took money for my personal interest,” he concluded. | Pf
