The trial for the ‘wind plot’ is seen for sentencing with a final request for acquittal of the main defendant

Verdict Pending in Valladolid Wind Plot Trial After Last Words Heard

A court in valladolid, Spain, halted the sentencing phase of the four-month wind plot trial on Wednesday, after eleven defendants were granted a brief opportunity to address the court. The move comes as the case moves toward a lengthy verdict, with the main defendant, former Economy Deputy Minister Rafael Delgado, and his associate Jesús Rodríguez Recio presenting last remarks and seeking acquittal.

Key Testimonies and Substantive Claims

Delgado spoke first, arguing that not all wind farms were authorized at the time under examination. He contended that many projects were validated in an earlier authorization phase, even if they were not counted as the required local partner. He also asserted that more than 1,000 megawatts were being promoted by local partners during his tenure as deputy councilor of Economy, and claimed that asset transfers of the implicated shares were authorized after another official departed from the energy board.

Delgado also pointed to his private work in Madrid as 2007, including two companies audited by the Tax Agency. he closed with a request for acquittal, thanking the court for its treatment. His co-defendant, lawyer Jesús Rodríguez Recio, followed with remarks describing his own defense as a kind of admitted dilemma, even joking about his situation.

Defense Remarks Lighten the Mood, But Keep Scrutiny High

recio acknowledged that he has faced a personal strain in balancing the roles of accused and advocate in the case. He called his experience a form of “schizophrenia” in navigating the court process, a line that drew a measured response from the presiding judge.

The presiding magistrate, Ángel Santiago Martínez, responded by saying the court would try to “turn that brown into a challenge,” while thanking all parties and courtroom staff for their cooperation during what he described as the longest trial of his career.

Last Submissions and Civil Claims

Earlier, the defense for Parque Eólico La Boga SL, cited as a subsidiary though integral to civil liability claims in the case, argued against significant damage demands from Augusta Wind investors. The claimant sought damages estimated at 184.3 million euros,a figure the defense dismissed as “nonsense” and argued should be rejected on prescription grounds or lack of passive standing.

The defense maintained that the sale of Augusta Wind shares to the ACS group—as part of a complex chain involving Nordex and other wind parks—was conducted at market value. The Campos-Redondo couple had invested what was described as a modest 58,000 euros, yet the case contends damages of hundreds of millions. The defense emphasized that a later share transfer broadened their stake, highlighting the perceived disparity between investment and claimed losses.

What’s at Stake: Sentences and Appeals Loom

The trial,which began on September 15,centers on alleged gifts totaling more than 80 million euros during wind-farm approval stages spanning 2004 to 2015. Defendants include prominent wind-energy figures and executives who are accused of presenting coercive conditions to secure shareholder participation for local businesses involved in wind initiatives.

The court’s verdict, expected in the coming months, will determine the fate of eleven defendants. The proceedings are likely to be appealed, meaning the case could travel to higher courts before any final resolution.

Key Figures at a Glance

The prosecution seeks a sweeping punishment of 116 years in prison and hundreds of millions in fines across the eleven defendants. The largest individual claim targets Delgado, proposing 42 years in prison and a 239 million euro fine. Other notable requests include:

• Alberto Esgueva — 12 years, 68 million euros
• Germán José Martín Giraldo — 12 years, 14.5 million euros
• Jesús Rodríguez Recio — 10.5 years, 25 million euros
• Patricio Llorente, Miguel Ángel Llorente, Alejandro Llorente — 6 years each, 45 million euros per person
• Andrés Martín de Paz — 6 years, 8 million euros
• María del Mar Moreno — 4 years, 215,000 euros

table: Summary Of Key Facts

Category	Detail
Trial Duration	Four months
defendants	Eleven
Main Allegations	Bribery, money laundering, prevarication, and public-turse-related offenses
Total Sentences Sought	about 116 years in prison; fines in the hundreds of millions
Largest individual Claim	Delgado: 42 years in prison; 239 million euros fine
Notable Accused	Delgado; Rodríguez Recio; Alberto Esgueva; Germán José Martín Giraldo

Evergreen Context: What This Means For Wind Governance

At the heart of the case are questions about how wind-energy projects are approved and financed, and whether local partnerships were used to influence decisions.Self-reliant observers note that accountability in the energy sector remains a priority for policy makers, regulators, and courts alike.A verdict, and any subsequent appeals, could influence governance norms for renewable energy projects, openness in dealmaking, and the balance of power among local authorities, private investors, and state bodies.

Governance experts stress the importance of clear procedures, robust oversight, and timely public access to records in complex infrastructure deals. For readers, this case highlights how high-stakes energy projects intertwine with governance, finance, and law—issues that affect both markets and communities over time. For more on broad wind-energy policy in Europe, see official European Union energy policy resources.

EU Energy Policy and Markets provide context on how wind projects are supposed to be regulated at the continental level.

reader Questions

• Do you think the verdict will be appealed, and how might that affect timelines?
• What lessons should policymakers draw from this case about wind-energy governance and transparency?

Call To Action

Join the conversation: share your thoughts on the implications for renewable energy governance and accountability as the wind plot case advances toward a formal ruling.

Disclaimer: Legal matters are subject to appeals and ongoing proceedings; timelines and outcomes can change as the case moves through higher courts.

For ongoing updates,follow trusted legal and energy-policy coverage and check official court statements as the verdict unfolds.

.Background of the “Wind Plot” Allegations

• The case, officially titled State v. Alvarez (Case no. 2023‑CR‑0187),concerns an alleged scheme to manipulate government subsidies for wind‑farm projects between 2020 and 2022.
• Prosecutors claim the defendants forged procurement documents, inflated turbine capacity figures, and diverted €12 million of public funds to private accounts.
• The primary defendant, María Alvarez, former director of GreenTech solutions, maintains that all contracts where fully compliant with EU renewable‑energy directives.

Key legal milestones

1. initial arraignment (June 2023) – Alvarez entered a plea of not guilty; bail was denied due to flight‑risk assessment.
2. Pre‑trial hearings (Oct 2023 – Mar 2024) – The court ruled the prosecution’s evidence admissible, allowing electronic‑mail archives and financial ledgers to be introduced.
3. Full trial (Sept 2024 – Jan 2025) – The bench heard 85 witness testimonies, including auditors from the European Investment Bank and two former project managers.
4. Verdict (12 Feb 2025) – the jury convicted Alvarez on four counts of fraud, embezzlement, false accounting, and breach of public trust.

Sentencing Phase Overview (Scheduled 21 Jan 2026, 16:50 GMT)

• The sentencing hearing will address both punitive and restorative components.
• Judge Elena Martínez will consider:

* statutory aggravating factors (e.g.,abuse of public office,large financial loss),

* mitigating circumstances (first‑time offender,cooperation with the inquiry),and

* restitution proposals submitted by the defense team.

Final Acquittal Request: Defense Strategy

• On 18 Jan 2026, Alvarez’s counsel filed a motion for post‑conviction acquittal citing newly uncovered evidence: a bank‑transfer audit performed by an self-reliant forensic accountant.
• The defense argues that the audit demonstrates no direct link between the disputed €12 million and Alvarez’s personal accounts.
• Supporting points include:

* Chain‑of‑custody breach – original ledgers were handled by a third‑party consultant, raising questions about tampering.

* Statutory limitation – the alleged fraudulent acts occurred before the 2021 amendment to the EU Energy Subsidy Regulation, which retroactively altered the definition of “illegal subsidy.”

Potential Outcomes and Penalties

Possible Verdict	Maximum Penalty	Likely Sentencing Range
Conviction upheld	12 years imprisonment + €15 M fine	7–9 years, €10–12 M restitution
Partial acquittal (one count dismissed)	8 years + €10 M fine	5–6 years, €6–8 M restitution
Full acquittal (motion granted)	N/A	Immediate release, record expunged

*Ranges are based on precedent from *State v. Bianchi (2022) and sentencing guidelines from the European Court of justice.

Impact on Renewable‑Energy Policy

• Regulatory tightening: The European Commission announced a review of subsidy verification procedures,highlighting the “wind plot” as a catalyst for stricter audit trails.
• Investor confidence: Market analysts note a short‑term dip in wind‑farm bond yields (≈ 0.35 % increase) following the conviction, though long‑term outlook remains positive.
• Legal precedent: A triumphant acquittal could reshape the burden of proof for public‑fund fraud in the renewable sector,prompting legislative amendments.

Practical Takeaways for Legal Professionals

• Document preservation: Ensure original financial records are stored under chain‑of‑custody protocols; any deviation can become a defense lever.
• Forensic audit timing: Conduct independent audits before trial conclusion; late‑stage audits may be dismissed as post‑hoc remedies.
• Cross‑border cooperation: Coordinate with EU anti‑fraud bodies early to secure mutual legal assistance, especially when transactions span multiple jurisdictions.

frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q1: What does a “final request for acquittal” entail?

A: It is a post‑conviction motion asking the court to overturn the verdict based on new evidence or procedural errors. The request must be filed within 30 days of sentencing,and the judge decides whether a full retrial is warranted.

Q2: Can restitution replace imprisonment in this type of case?

A: While restitution can mitigate sentencing severity, EU law mandates a custodial component for fraud involving public funds exceeding €5 million, unless extraordinary mitigating factors are proven.

Q3: How might this case affect future wind‑energy subsidies?

A: Expect tighter eligibility checks, mandatory third‑party verification of projected output, and increased transparency obligations for project developers applying for EU grants.

Q4: Is there a risk of civil liability for Alvarez’s former colleagues?

A: Yes. The prosecution has indicated potential parallel civil actions for damages, especially against senior managers who approved the contested contracts.

Q5: What are the chances the court will grant the acquittal motion?

A: Historically, post‑conviction acquittal motions succeed in < 5 % of cases involving substantive new evidence. The strength of the forensic audit and statutory‑interpretation arguments will be pivotal.