The National Court judge Alejandro Abascal has accepted the competence to investigate the facts denounced for an alleged crime of fraud in the Christmas Lottery draw on December 22, when an employee inserted a ball with a number into the drum. Abascal has requested the State Lottery and Gambling State Society (SELAE) to send him a report on the “incident” reported by several individuals.
The National Court asks Lotteries for a report on the “incident” of the lost ball in the Christmas draw20 years gambling with the postal code of his town
El Gordo came out of the ‘fake news’
489 million Christmas Lottery draw prizes have been collected in just one day
The National Court asks Lotteries for a report on the “incident” of the lost ball in the Christmas drawPHOTO GALLERY The Christmas Lottery 2019
In a car, the magistrate, following the criteria of the Hearing Prosecutor , also asks SELAE to inform him if there is a protocol for such cases and, if so, if it was applied. This week the prosecution of the National Court urged the judge to send the request for information in the face of the complaints that have come to this court.
Judge Abascal has also requested that he submit the entire recording of the moment in which the worker is seen to make a gesture with his closed hand when approaching the tube through which the balls with the numbers of the draw are introduced. The movement initially went unnoticed, but several users broadcast on social networks the moment in which the worker is seen inserting the ball into the drum.
The controversy aroused forced the state body to issue a statement that same morning in which it indicated that: “One of the circumstances foreseen in the process of introducing the balls into the drums is that some of them can bounce towards the outside.” In this case, they explained, “the established protocol indicates that the operator responsible for introducing the balls into the drum must proceed to manually insert them into the drum.”
The magistrate of the Central Investigating Court number 6, indicates in his resolution that “it is appropriate to accept the competence of these proceedings by this central investigating court number six and to agree on those of evidence interested by the Prosecutor’s Office.”