"The land was bought to build a house and that's why the project was put in my wife's name. Later, her signature was forged." This is how one of the defendants in the Stratvs case, the architect Miguel Ángel Armas Matallana, explained the beginning of the "permanent deception" (as defined by the Prosecutor's Office) of this project promoted by Juan Francisco Rosa. The fact is that in the place where a house was supposedly going to be rehabilitated for the couple, an industrial winery, a restaurant, a shop and another long list of annexed facilities ended up being built.
As he explained in his last statement in the Courts, Miguel Ángel Armas came into contact with Rosa because the businessman was looking for "a place to build a winery" and opted for his farm. Armas assures that he and his wife bought that land from other relatives because they intended to build a house, in the historical house that already existed there. However, he maintains that the plans changed later, upon coming into contact with Rosa and his proposal to build a winery.
"Juan Francisco Rosa told me that he was in charge of processing the file," declared Armas Matallana. According to his version, one thing is the supposed project to build a house that the couple had, and in which his wife's name did appear, and another is the one that Rosa finally carried out (and in which Miguel Ángel Armas participated as architect and director of the work).
Regarding why his wife's name (and not Juan Francisco Rosa's) appears in the winery's license applications, Armas stated that "someone would attribute the representation" of his wife, since "documents appeared" that she "had not signed." In fact, although Armas speaks of his wife's signature being "forged," her signature was not even faked. Her name simply appears and, below, a signature that has nothing to do with hers. According to the architect, "he had no knowledge of the falsification of documents because he never saw that." However, his wife did later sign the transfer of the license to Juan Francisco Rosa.
The license in question, which the investigation also maintains is illegal, only authorized the rehabilitation of that pre-existing house and the construction of a 900-square-meter winery-warehouse, which has nothing to do with what was finally built. In fact, the winery alone occupies 2,500 square meters, and in total the complex has more than 12,000.
"I never wanted to harm Miguel Ángel or his wife"
"Miguel Ángel placed a lot of trust in me in many ways. I never wanted to harm Miguel Ángel or his wife in anything, and if I harmed them, I didn't do it with bad intentions", declared Juan Francisco Rosa before the judge and the prosecutor on November 26. However, Armas has become one of the main defendants in the case along with Rosa (due to the number of crimes he is charged with), while his wife had to testify as a witness.
"She didn't sign anything," Rosa responded when asked about this issue. According to him, it was an employee of his company (who already testified in the Courts and was even charged, although his indictment has been dismissed) who was in charge of "the papers." He presented them "as a verbal representative," according to Rosa. "The lawyers told him to go and bring the documents and everything came from Galerías Rosa," he related.
Regarding whether this employee signed documents, Rosa stated that "he doesn't remember." And he also answered "I don't know" when asked if he had signed anything in the name of Miguel Ángel Armas's wife.
It is not even recorded that Rosa bought the farm
Regarding the ownership of the land where the winery was built, Armas declared that "half" of the farm was his "and the other part belonged to Negrín." That is, to the family that is involved in the case because they denounce that their land was usurped. When the lawyer of the private prosecution asked him if they bought the Negrín's part before starting the project, Armas refused to answer.
As for the part of the farm that belonged to Miguel Ángel Armas, there is actually no document that proves that Rosa bought it. Both the businessman and the architect claim that he did, but there is no data on how the payment was made, nor has Juan Francisco Rosa "justified to this day the slightest ownership of the farm," as Judge Silvia Muñoz emphasized in the order in which she ordered the closure of the winery.
In fact, in different documents it was even "simulated" that Stratvs is located on another different farm, which does belong to Rosa, and where there is really nothing. And in the work certificates signed by Armas as architect and director of the work, and which were signed before a notary, the exact location of the farm is not specified, among other irregularities (such as reflecting a description of the works that had nothing to do with what was actually done).
Just for signing those certificates (the one for the start and the one for the end of the work), Armas will have to answer for two alleged crimes of document forgery, in addition to other charges for urban planning, environmental and heritage crimes, as the technical manager of the work.
Rosa: "I am not the Cadastre"
The alteration of Cadastre data is precisely another of the "legs" of the case, since different mortgage guarantees were constituted on a farm that in reality had hardly any value, simulating that the Stratvs winery was located on it. One of those mortgage guarantees was used to respond to a debt of the Princesa Yaiza hotel with the Treasury, which led to the indictment of new crimes and to the State Attorney's Office appearing in the case.
"I am not the Cadastre," Rosa responded up to two times, when he had to answer in the Courts for this issue. "Why wasn't the winery built in the place where the cadastral sheet was provided?" asked prosecutor Ignacio Stampa. "It must be a mistake, but I am not the Cadastre", Juan Francisco Rosa reiterated. According to him, "the technicians", whose identity he did not specify, "took care of the cadastral documentation." "In my previous statement I already said that it would be a mistake if the one from another place was provided," he added. In addition, he assured that he "does not remember" why the winery was not actually built on that farm.
Regarding the work certificates signed by Miguel Ángel Armas, Rosa stated that he "does not know" if they identify the location of the winery and said that he "did not know" if "that which was done for the deed" in the Notary's Office "was fraudulent". According to his statement, he asked Armas to sign the certificates but he "did not take care" of it, "but the girls who worked there" (in Galerías Rosa).
For his part, the architect declared that "he did not take care of the cadastral sheet", but Juan Francisco Rosa. "Did you think they used you, that they deceived you?". "No," Armas responded. "I see no reason for the deception in that (in that they have "confused" the cadastral reference of the farm). In the project it is where it is."
A very different vision from that maintained by the judge and the prosecutor, who in the hearing in which the closure of the winery was requested stated that "reality surpasses fiction" in Stratvs, "in the sense that it is a permanent deception during the last 15 years." The closure, ordered more than a year ago, was endorsed by the Provincial Court, which reminded the property that the possible "economic damage is not caused by the precautionary measure (of closure), but by the irregularities that have been verified and are being the object of a criminal process."