Turull, Romeva, Forcadell, Bassa and Rull imprisoned without bail.
He is also activating Find and arrest warrants for those who have gone abroad.
The Judge is going ahead with charges of rebellion which need an element of violence to make them stick.
Below I have posted an article which gives his reasons justifying the charges. I am still shaking my head over the Guardia Civil's 'passive violence' comment, but this bloke has overstepped the bounds.
Basic points which I can't swallow are that the Indep leaders knew that the police on 1 Oct would prevent the vote, so they are to blame for the violence on the street because they encouraged the people to vote.
That there was a fanatical violence inherent in the indep movement which the leaders planned to use and unleash.
Placing the blame on the victims is like saying to a woman you were raped because you wore a short skirt, but Llarena seems to be of that school.
Sure we knew they would try to stop it, but not like that.
That a judge has a vision of inherent violence which the indep leaders planned to use is only in his head, and has no bearing on reality. He sees violence whre it doesn't exist. Plus he should base his decisions on facts not suppositions, that is a judges job.
When a judge has to resort to bending definitions to allow a result for political reasons then there is no justice because they are changing their own rules.
Personally I am sickened by the way this judge has done things. He appears to be of the old Opus Dei-Sacred Unity of Spain School and is determined to make the offenders pay to the maximum. The shadow of Paco is long.
All this has done is convince me that Catalunya's future is divorced from Spain.
Article.
The Supreme Court judge Pablo Llarena is firmly convinced that the main players responsible for the Process had devised a plan to achieve the independence of Catalonia out of legal channels and were aware that acts of violence could take place on 1-O and still they encouraged the Catalans so that they went out and went to vote.
In the indictment, the instructor argues that after the events occurred on September 20 before the Ministry of Economy, when 40,000 people surrounded the building while the police were inside, they reflected the existence of "a risk that the future demonstrations will lead to instrumentalized violence to achieve independence. "
For Llarena, it is "evident" that what happened on September 20, "although it was not the reflection of a violence that was devised from the beginning as an instrument for the attainment of independence (which this resolution does not exclude). Then he allowed everyone involved in the process to represent the risk that future mobilizations could explode with episodes of harm and damage to the social group. "
The judge considers that "from the incendiary convocation" before the headquarters of the Conselleria "what happened was far from the peaceful action that was claimed in some messages." Once there, according to the judge's story, "the crowd surrounded the vehicles of the Civil Guard, which ended up devastated and destroyed, inside and outside." The weapons that were inside the cars "were at the mercy of the vandals."
In this way, he argues that mobilizing people to vote on October 1, knowing that the State Security Forces and Bodies had the judicial order to prevent the vote of 1-O "supposes, not already accept the risk of a violence clearly representable, but directly to promote a mass of citizens to overflow by force any intention of containment that may come from the State, as finally happened on the day of the vote.
Llarena believes that those accused of rebellion have been for years promoting the collective desire for independence among broad sectors of the population; they have rehearsed massive mobilizations conformed by hundreds of thousands of followers; and they have convinced the followers "that they held a legitimacy for an independence that they knew constitutionally impossible".
The instructor goes on to say that "those who made major contributions to the cupola of the event after September 20, of course, represented that the violent fanaticism of many of their followers had to be unleashed." In his opinion, the "persistence in his criminal determination" with this knowledge is proof of his "will to incorporate the use of force into the mechanism to achieve a secession that he did not want to renounce".
It also indicates that "it was decided to use the power of the mass to face a police action that they knew aimed at making the referendum impossible, so that the vote could be developed, enabling and favoring, not only that the results of the referendum allow the proclamation of independence but the Rule of Law surrendered to the violent determination of a part of the population that threatened to extend. "
Thus, for the magistrate the crime of rebellion is "fully applicable" to those who, "knowing the inescapable social outbreak that was already inherent in the facts, incorporated it into their criminal behavior and persisted in making essential contributions that would promote the illicit behavior that they deployed. "
He is also activating Find and arrest warrants for those who have gone abroad.
The Judge is going ahead with charges of rebellion which need an element of violence to make them stick.
Below I have posted an article which gives his reasons justifying the charges. I am still shaking my head over the Guardia Civil's 'passive violence' comment, but this bloke has overstepped the bounds.
Basic points which I can't swallow are that the Indep leaders knew that the police on 1 Oct would prevent the vote, so they are to blame for the violence on the street because they encouraged the people to vote.
That there was a fanatical violence inherent in the indep movement which the leaders planned to use and unleash.
Placing the blame on the victims is like saying to a woman you were raped because you wore a short skirt, but Llarena seems to be of that school.
Sure we knew they would try to stop it, but not like that.
That a judge has a vision of inherent violence which the indep leaders planned to use is only in his head, and has no bearing on reality. He sees violence whre it doesn't exist. Plus he should base his decisions on facts not suppositions, that is a judges job.
When a judge has to resort to bending definitions to allow a result for political reasons then there is no justice because they are changing their own rules.
Personally I am sickened by the way this judge has done things. He appears to be of the old Opus Dei-Sacred Unity of Spain School and is determined to make the offenders pay to the maximum. The shadow of Paco is long.
All this has done is convince me that Catalunya's future is divorced from Spain.
Article.
The Supreme Court judge Pablo Llarena is firmly convinced that the main players responsible for the Process had devised a plan to achieve the independence of Catalonia out of legal channels and were aware that acts of violence could take place on 1-O and still they encouraged the Catalans so that they went out and went to vote.
In the indictment, the instructor argues that after the events occurred on September 20 before the Ministry of Economy, when 40,000 people surrounded the building while the police were inside, they reflected the existence of "a risk that the future demonstrations will lead to instrumentalized violence to achieve independence. "
For Llarena, it is "evident" that what happened on September 20, "although it was not the reflection of a violence that was devised from the beginning as an instrument for the attainment of independence (which this resolution does not exclude). Then he allowed everyone involved in the process to represent the risk that future mobilizations could explode with episodes of harm and damage to the social group. "
The judge considers that "from the incendiary convocation" before the headquarters of the Conselleria "what happened was far from the peaceful action that was claimed in some messages." Once there, according to the judge's story, "the crowd surrounded the vehicles of the Civil Guard, which ended up devastated and destroyed, inside and outside." The weapons that were inside the cars "were at the mercy of the vandals."
In this way, he argues that mobilizing people to vote on October 1, knowing that the State Security Forces and Bodies had the judicial order to prevent the vote of 1-O "supposes, not already accept the risk of a violence clearly representable, but directly to promote a mass of citizens to overflow by force any intention of containment that may come from the State, as finally happened on the day of the vote.
Llarena believes that those accused of rebellion have been for years promoting the collective desire for independence among broad sectors of the population; they have rehearsed massive mobilizations conformed by hundreds of thousands of followers; and they have convinced the followers "that they held a legitimacy for an independence that they knew constitutionally impossible".
The instructor goes on to say that "those who made major contributions to the cupola of the event after September 20, of course, represented that the violent fanaticism of many of their followers had to be unleashed." In his opinion, the "persistence in his criminal determination" with this knowledge is proof of his "will to incorporate the use of force into the mechanism to achieve a secession that he did not want to renounce".
It also indicates that "it was decided to use the power of the mass to face a police action that they knew aimed at making the referendum impossible, so that the vote could be developed, enabling and favoring, not only that the results of the referendum allow the proclamation of independence but the Rule of Law surrendered to the violent determination of a part of the population that threatened to extend. "
Thus, for the magistrate the crime of rebellion is "fully applicable" to those who, "knowing the inescapable social outbreak that was already inherent in the facts, incorporated it into their criminal behavior and persisted in making essential contributions that would promote the illicit behavior that they deployed. "