The witnesses in Attorney General Ortiz's case make the mobile protocol clear

The Attorney General, García Ortiz, is once again against the ropes. The witnesses' statements have debunked and undermined Ortiz's justifications.

Specifically, last Thursday, both Almudena Lastra and Julián Salto testified as witnesses. They have both dismantled García Ortiz's theories.

Similarly, they explained the reality of the protocol, which has little to do with the deletion of mobile phone content.

Almudena Lastra, like prosecutor Julián Salto, has argued that it doesn't exist in the Prosecutor's Office. Specifically, the witness detailed that WhatsApp messages aren't deleted when there's a change of device. What takes place is a directed operation, in this case, by the Community of Madrid, and all the information from the old phone is transferred to the new device.

García Ortiz won't be able to justify why they proceeded with the deletion of the same.

It's important to remember that the UCO included in one of its reports that "0 messages" were found in messaging applications. These data were extracted from the dump of Attorney General García Ortiz's mobile device.

A device that was seized by the Civil Guard during the search of his office. Shortly after, investigators confirmed that the highest representative of the Public Ministry had changed his mobile device five days before the search of his office.

That is, a week after the Supreme Court opened a case against him.

Almudena Lastra's Confession That Firmly Haunts García Ortiz

The investigation by Judge Ángel Hurtado against Attorney General Álvaro García Ortiz continues in the Supreme Court. This Thursday, Almudena Lastra, Madrid's chief prosecutor, confirmed her testimony before the Supreme Court, expanding on relevant details of the case.

In her statement, Lastra reiterated that the press published confidential information that could only have come from the Prosecutor's Office itself.

The prosecutor explained that she participated in drafting an informative note to refute "errors" spread about the González Amador case.

However, she claimed she doesn't take responsibility for the content, pointing out that it included confidential data that shouldn't have been published.

Lastra detailed a conversation held on March 14 with the Attorney General after reading news about an email sent to prosecutor Julián Salto. According to Lastra, when asked if he leaked the information, García Ortiz replied, "That doesn't matter now," avoiding a direct clarification.

That same day, Lastra noticed that the press had access to data not shared with either the defense of the investigated or with the Dean's Office. Therefore, she insisted that the leak could only have originated from the Prosecutor's Office, increasing suspicions against García Ortiz.

The economic crimes prosecutor, Julián Salto, also appeared this Thursday to provide key data for the development of the investigation. Salto is leading the case against González Amador, Isabel Díaz Ayuso's partner, for alleged economic and tax crimes.

The investigation seeks to determine if García Ortiz leaked confidential information, which could constitute a crime of revealing secrets.

On January 29, García Ortiz must appear before the Supreme Court as a suspect in these accusations.

The controversy has also sparked political reactions, with Minister Félix Bolaños questioning the strength of the evidence presented. Bolaños criticized Judge Hurtado's order, suggesting that the accusations against the Attorney General lack solid foundation.

In parallel, suspicions have been raised about alleged commissions linked to Ayuso's boyfriend and a director of the Quirón Group.

This case has put the Prosecutor's Office in the eye of the storm, generating debates about transparency and ethics in judicial institutions.