Judge Peinado suspends Begoña Gómez’s testimony on July 19

Judge Peinado postpones Begoña Gómez’s testimony to July 19

Begoña Gómez’s testimony before Judge Juan Carlos Peinado was suspended on the scheduled day. Her defense argued she was unaware of the case file and had not been notified of one complaint filed by the association Hazte Oír. Peinado accepted this objection and set a new date for July 19. The case pogre amid popular accusations on social media and videos, with original source documents largely missing from the narrative.

Why was Begoña Gómez’s testimony suspended?

There are two interpretations, neither innocent. The first: a procedural defect. One accuser, Hazte Oír, had expanded its complaint, and this document was not formally notified to the defendant. Her defense used this lack of knowledge to halt the appearance. Sources say Gómez told the judge she did not know the reasons or evidence against her.

The second interpretation: delaying is winning. Her lawyers manage the complaint, making her claim of ignorance striking, though she has the right to appear as a defendant. It is reported that the judge ordered the document to be forwarded, but her receipt signature is missing. Various explanations exist—no one delivered it, or someone else received it—but none have been proven. For now, the suspension is procedural, and the calendar resets the appointment to July 19.

Complutense Rector places a call to La Moncloa

Gómez’s defense requested suspending the testimony of the Rector of Complutense University, scheduled for 1:00 PM. It was not suspended. The Rector testified that the President’s vvife called him to La Moncloa to collaborate on the chair, and he visited that location to discuss the Master’s in Competitive Social Transformation. Strikingly, the procedure went in the opposite direction: usually, the professor receives visitors in his office. During questioning, the judge had to interrupt: “Stop gesticulating; it influences the witness.”

Inmark, the chair, and a Venezuelan businessman’s coworking space

Documentary charges repeat. Begoña Gómez was director of business for Spain and Portugal at Inmark Europa, not just a shareholder, according to published information. In 2018, in that role, she gave an interview about 360-degree marketing whose comments have not aged well. She later domiciled her company, Transforma TSC, in the coworking offices of Impact Hub, a space ultimately owned by Venezuelan-Spanish businessman Miguel Ángel Capriles.

Barrabés, the video call, and the arrest warning

On Monday, July 15, at 11:00 AM, businessman Juan Carlos Barrabés was scheduled to testify as a witness. The judge warned Begoña Gómez of her obligation to appear and that failure to do so without just cause could result in an arrest warrant. Finally, Barrabés testified from his home via video call due to health reasons, making Gómez’s presence unnecessary.

On the Master’s website, Barrabés appeared in the faculty list in a screenshot from December 6, 2022. On the April 8, 2024 version, he no longer appears. Begoña, however, maintains the same roles in both: director of the extraordinary chair and co-director and professor of the Master’s.

The Prosecutor’s Office requests limiting the case and excluding Globalia

The prosecutor appealed to the Madrid Provincial Court, accusing the judge of acting without filter. He requested excluding facts related to Globalia and determining/limiting the rest, as they are unjustified and incomprehensible. Meanwhile, Gómez’s defense asked the Court to prevent Judge Peinado from conducting a universal investigation against her and to dismiss the case due to lack of evidence.

The website that is only offline and the treatment in court

Rumors circulated that she deleted her page. It is not deleted: it is offline. The domain was renewed on September 27 and hosted in the United States, and the content remains recoverable in internet archives. Another recurring detail is courtroom protocol: there is no record of being asked to stand before the microphone, a requirement for lesser appearances. Those who have watched many testimonies know that liturgy is not applied equally to everyone.

---

With the case divided between the court, the Provincial Court, and several popular accusers, the issue is no longer when she will testify, but what remains in the file when she finally does. The appointment is July 19. The calendar ends there. The analysis stalls there.