Businessman from Alicante Javier Reina He gave assurance before the court yesterday state court who is judging you fraud crimes, embezzlement, falsification of business documents, unfair management and corporate crimes The 100,000 euros demanded by the former partner who put him on the stand together with the prosecutor’s office, Novelda businessman Ignacio Torregrosasunflower oil did not contribute to their business as claimed by the plaintiff, but in reality it was a participation credit. Ociex International SLflow Business Alicante SL., is the CEO of Reina and the plaintiff is its partner.
The hearing of these incidents, which date back more than 10 years and where the defendants were tried by the special prosecutor’s office with a request for up to 12 years in prison (the Prosecutor’s Office wants 8 years), started at the Seventh Criminal Court of Peace. department headed by Judge Joaquín Orellanawho presented this possibility to the parties before the hearing started reach an agreement.
The complainant requested getting back this 100,000 euros plus interest and costs, What neither Reina nor her partner accepts and blames Francisco Javier Llobregat. Both of them denied the charges against them.
investment partner
The person, who is also the president of the Advanced Tertiary Association, described his first relationship with Torregrosa as “a relationship of trust and friendship” and assured that he knew from the beginning that Torregrosa was his “investment partner”. Ociex International and contains written information regarding all contracts signed by the company owned by Romandanse. CFO.
Responding to questions from all parties except the special prosecutor’s office, which the defendant refused to answer, Reina claimed that there was an agreement to make a deal. trading with sunflower oil, (He is questioned by both the Public Ministry and Torregrosa’s lawyer, who think it is a hoax), but this completely separates him from the 100,000 euros.
He added that the company had on more than one occasion offered to buy his shares as well as refund the money plus interest, and the complainant always refused. The statement noted by Llobregat: “There was a lot of talk, but I never saw a check.”
Account transfer
In his statement as a witness, he said that he did not understand why the 100,000 euros were transferred from the account in which he had deposited them to another account, also belonging to Ociex International, but from a different banking institution, and from there from half to one. Ociex Spain. «I asked and they said it was to pay the expenses, but at that moment “I told my wife at the time that they were cheating on me.”Torregrosa said:
The expression of his colleague on the bench had the same meaning as Reina’s expression. Llobregat justified that Ociex Internacional did not have its own headquarters or staff (he said it was supported by the Ociex Spain team) to reduce spending. Before coming to Torregros the oil business was already going on (though nothing ultimately materialized) and Novelda added that the businessman contributed this 100,000 euros to enter the company, which he stated did not know how to explain why he wanted to leave.
Isidro LopezAnother person, who was one of the then partners of Ociex Internacional along with Reina, Llobregat, Torregrosa and Ociex España, and who has no connection with the company today, testified that “(Torregrosa’s) participation credit” was certain, covering up the two defendants. 20% share change » and the company was intended to have liquidity.
Although he admitted it too “Sometimes I wasn’t even clear about my pockets”It is alleged that money was transferred in one of the commercial companies so that the money contributed by the complainant would go to other Reina companies.
Complainant: “I just want to take back what’s mine”
Sharing a personal relationship table and tablecloth with their respective families a complaint and a lawsuit. This is the path followed by the relations between businessmen Javier Reina and the defendant and plaintiff Ignacio Torregrosa in this process.
In his witness statement, Torregrosa flatly denied that the disputed €100,000 was in fact a participation loan. «I put this as a concept in the transfer because I trusted Javier and he told me it would be better for me to do it this way. “Even though it was said that there was a joint signature, this was not true,” he said.
The complainant also said he didn’t mean to hurt anyone, “just take back what’s mine.” And he stated that he was there rejected returns money “because they in no case amounts reaching 100,000 eurosThis is the money I invested in a sunflower oil business that didn’t work.
The Novelda businessman insisted at the time that he had full confidence in Reina and other partners. “He told me there were some files to sign, so I signed. They were my friends.”
In response to the defense’s questions, he added: “If it was a participatory loan, it would go to a bank.” notary asking for warranty, but I didn’t do that.
He added that his lawyers gave him advice. not depositing all the money at once, “But I did it because Javi told me we needed to bring us the oil that was never coming.”