A lawyer pleaded guilty this Thursday to defrauding a soldier at Alcantarilla airbase. The veteran, who remains paraplegic after a skydiving accident, fought to obtain funds he believed would cover medical reports and other expenses. The attorney concealed money given by his client, supposedly for medical needs, and failed to disclose it in court records. A complaint against the state will be filed before military jurisdiction. The court had dismissed the case without notifying the client, allowing all objection deadlines to lapse and making procedural recourse effectively impossible. The matter was closed by consent this Thursday in one section of the overall case. The Provincial Court moved its proceedings to Elche.
In the courtroom, the defendant sat on the bench as the bank’s attorney. The court and the patient advocate, Raúl Díez, have encountered multiple complaints of fraud linked to similar situations, both in his private practice and in cases carried for the association he represented. On Thursday, the court heard up to four separate attempts to hold the lawyer accountable, before settling on a consent-based disposition that charged him with wrongdoing. The agreements required the lawyer to serve a one-year prison term if he pleaded guilty and to enter a payment plan to cover compensation. Initially, jail time was not mandatory, though the suspension hinges on the timely payment of the owed money. If there is noncompliance, his status and potential imprisonment would be reviewed. Of the four eligibility cases reviewed that Thursday, only two could be resolved; the other two fell apart due to procedural issues in reporting to insurance providers. These developments reflect a broader pattern of alleged misconduct surrounding the attorney in question.
alleged negligence
Sergeant Angel Morga asserts that on the day of the accident the lawyer acted as the victim’s adversary rather than as a counselor, while pursuing compensation from the State for what occurred during the transfer to the health facility on December 18, 2008. He contends that the injuries were aggravated and that a relative had recommended the lawyer, initially leading to satisfaction with the service. Morga recalls that the first funds were requested to cover medical reports and ongoing court proceedings. He explains, “We believed in him and trusted he would handle everything.” After donating up to 12,000 euros for medical reports and part of the case, the lawyer remained unreachable. “He told us we would pursue everything,” Morga notes, but after payment he heard nothing further.
The accused attorney appeared on the bench during one of this Thursday’s hearings, a scene captured by local press. The victim states, “We trusted him, so we didn’t suspect anything at first.” Yet the pattern emerged when calls went unanswered and eventually stopped altogether. “One day the Cartagena Military Court surprised us; deadlines were missed and our complaint was dismissed,” he recalls. The realization of fraud grew as the case stalled, with no chance to reopen avenues of appeal. The pattern of delay and noncommunication left the victim feeling powerless and frustrated, unable to secure relief through the expected channels.
More than a decade earlier, the complaint was filed and this Thursday the case concluded with a public pronouncement in Section Seven of the Trial. By agreement, the lawyer agreed to repay the victim 3,000 euros in November, followed by a structured repayment plan of 300 euros per month until the total debt was settled. Morga admits a bitter outcome but suggests that accepting the deal was a choice between something and nothing. The underlying harm, he insists, was far greater than the compensation recovered. He notes that a review of the hospital referral protocol might reveal procedural errors in the prosecutor’s action that compounded the harm.
In a separate morning report, another case indicated the lawyer had held 3,000 euros from a different client for items that never went before a court. The outcome remains unresolved, but it signals a broader pattern of financial improprieties linked to the attorney.
If compensation is not paid, imprisonment remains a legal possibility.
The sentence is now final and cannot be appealed after the court approved the agreement. Raúl Díez is convicted of embezzlement and professional disloyalty. In addition to the suspended prison term, the ruling imposes a fine and bars him from practicing law for two years. If the funds are not remitted, the attorney faces potential jail time, though some affected individuals doubt they will ever recover the money. A victim remarked, “This feels like a strategy to save time; that’s how he operated all along.” Angel Morga echoes a similar sentiment, reflecting on the broader impact of the case and its conclusion.