El Plural reveals Judge Peinado’s home: villa with pool

Publishing Judge Peinado’s residence: pool and ‘storage’

Can the address of the judge handling the case involving Begoña Gómez be published? It has been. El Plural disclosed the location of Judge Peinado’s residence, the case’s presiding judge: a two-story property with a pool and mountain views, described as secluded. The information goes beyond the facade. It places the house just minutes from Isabel Díaz Ayuso’s hometown and links the province of Ávila to names like Pablo Casado, Ángel Acebes, or Sebastián González Vázquez. The consequence is immediate: the issue is no longer about a villa, but whether targeting a judge’s home is journalism or pressure.

Why the property’s ‘storage’ classification is disputed

This is where the detail that ignited the controversy comes in. According to circulating reports, the property is registered as a storage facility in the Cadastre. The difference is not cosmetic: a storage facility declares a significantly lower cadastral value than a residence, and the IBI (property tax) receipt depends on this value. Those supporting this claim add that, once construction is complete, the owner is obligated to report the change of use, and a municipal license does not exempt them from doing so. In short: if not updated, less tax is paid than required.

The accusation is serious and unconfirmed by any ruling. According to one participant, the IBI receipt is held only by the owner, the bank, and the municipality. Conversely, it is noted that the Spanish Cadastre has a significant update deficit, with built properties still registered as vacant land. Correcting this, if an error exists, would involve submitting the corresponding form.

Targeting and the limit of public interest

The second line of discussion is substantive: distinguishing between an elected official and a judge. A politician thrives on public exposure; a judge does not. Hence the repeated comparison: publishing a presiding judge’s address is equivalent to harassing a tax inspector or a police commissioner. “Nowadays, with a photo, they can extract even your bank password. It’s full-blown targeting”, summarizes one of the most cited reactions. Another adds that the pattern —some target, others act— is the same one the ETA terrorist organization applied for years, and, according to another participant, judicial associations have long denounced identical episodes: Judge Mercedes Alaya experienced this when investigating corruption in the ERE cases.

Not everyone sees it this way. Some argue that Peinado is merely an investigating judge who was on duty when the complaint was filed and processed it, and that the hunt would be the same against any substitute. Others, from the opposite side, demand exemplarity from those who judge: if fiscal rigor is preached, the first to comply should be the one signing rulings. Both arguments fit in the same paragraph and do not cancel each other out.

Who publishes and what the paragraph about Ávila adds

The media publishing the piece is El Plural, directed by Enric Sopena. Its ownership is attributed to the Lavinia Group, owned by Antoni Esteve Avilés and Victoria Piany Rovira. This fact has circulated as much as the video content, in a symmetric response: if the judge is targeted, let’s know who is targeting him.

The paragraph dedicated to Ávila, Casado, or Acebes links the province to a list of PP names without providing verifiable data about the property. It functions as environmental context, not as data.

What remains open

There is no ruling on the cadastral use or statement on the license. The case Peinado is handling continues its course. And the villa remains where it was, with a pool and mountain views. Now we all know where.