Germán Cobos, the Mexican lawyer who set up the Neurona Comunidad company in Spain, to which United We Can paid 232,000 euros in the 2019 electoral campaign for consulting work, testified this Monday afternoon by videoconference before the 42nd Investigating Court in Madrid that no funds were diverted to the party and that the money that left the consultant was to pay for services subcontracted to third parties.

Cobos was summoned at the same time as the also Mexican Waldemar Aguado, whose signature appears in part of the works that United We Can contributed to the court to prove that, contrary to what is suspected, there was no false hiring of Neurona to divert money in what could constitute an irregular financing crime or an electoral crime.

However, his appearance has been suspended without a date because the parties did not have the specific materials for which he was going to be questioned.

Focused on Cobos, who represented the two partners of Neurona Consulting César Hernández and Andrea Edlín and who entrusted the manager Elías Castejón to set up a company in Spain to contract with United We Can, has ruled out any irregularity in the entire management. And regarding the failure of dates in the contracts, a discrepancy that led Judge Juan José Escalonilla to suspect that it was false, he explained that it was an error and it was solely his responsibility. He sent a first contract, at United We Can it was misplaced and he had to send another one, it was there, according to his statement, that he danced the date.

As reported in sources present in the statement, Cobos has testified that the services for which more than 300,000 euros were paid to companies located in Mexico, has influenced the fact that they were suppliers with whom the Neurona Consulting parent company already had commercial relations and the funds corresponded to services provided, not only in tangible formats such as videos and photos, but also prior consulting.

He has also been questioned by the workers that Neurona Consulting had and has explained that he is aware that there were employees and collaborators who traveled to Spain to develop the project for United We Can. However, he did not know what type of employment relationship these people had with the consultant because it was not his area of ​​work.

For the popular accusation that Vox exercises in this matter, Cobos’s explanations are not convincing and have not been clear enough, especially regarding the workers, because they consider that it does not make sense that being the representative of the partners for all purposes in Spain and having to report to them did not know that information.