Sean Connery and his wife Micheline took up residence in the Caribbean after leaving Marbella. :: SUR
A sworn statement sent by Sean Connery to the Marbella court investigating the ‘Caso Goldfinger’ has convinced the magistrate to shelve the case against the actor. However a second Affidavit, sent at the same time by Connery’s wife, Micheline, has convinced the judge to maintain his allegations against her of fraud, planning offences and tax offences.
The judge admits that the statements made by both suspects “clear up events to a great extent” although he criticised the fact that his court received the answers to his questions a year and a half after the Affidavits were signed and more than three years after a letter rogatory was sent to the Bahamas, where the couple live, requesting their collaboration.
The judge states that there is still an indication that Micheline participated “directly and consciously” in the plan for the construction of the Malibu apartments at the centre of the investigation.
In her statement Micheline Connery says that since she acquired her husband’s shares in the firm Malibu S.A. in the 1980s, she was the only person who made decisions in relation with the company. She also admits to asking her lawyer “within legal possibilities” to do what was necessary to get the same planning designation for their property as their neighbour, who had built a block of flats.
She also claims that she was told that those procedures were normal at Marbella town hall. She adds that her links with the company were severed when the Malibu estate, where the Connerys had lived for several years, was sold.
In his statement Sean Connery denies all knowledge of the suspicious planning deals that led to the construction of the Malibu apartments where their villa had once stood and the alleged tax fraud involved. He says he knew nothing of the content of a contract which bears his signature but is written in Spanish, a language he insists he doesn’t speak.
The allegedly fraudulent planning deal was made during the notorious GIL era in Marbella. The James Bond actor’s responses to the questions were that he had had no dealings with (former mayor) Jesús Gil; he does not know (Malaya ringleader) Juan Antonio Roca and that he does not know and therefore has never had anything to do with (former mayor) Julián Felipe Muñoz Palomo. His sworn statement was 56 pages long.
The most surprising statement made by Connery is at the beginning of the document, which SUR has seen. After indicating that his Spanish lawyers - the Díaz Bastién firm, whose directors are also under suspicion in the case - had informed him that he had been “named as a party in criminal proceedings in Spain”, he states that he is making a statement voluntarily and with the aim of collaborating with and expediting the investigation, although he stresses: “without in any way submitting to the jurisdiction of the Spanish court or conceding the validity” of the official request for legal assistance sent from the Spanish authorities to those of the Bahamas.
In the statement, the actor insists that he had nothing to do with the signing of the agreements which are being investigated by the ‘Goldfinger operation’, and that he is unaware of their content. He also says he had no knowledge of the companies owned by Juan Antonio Roca, which appeared in the questions made by the judge.
With regard to his relationship with Jesús Gil he says he believed he had seen him at a public event and does not consider that this could be defined as knowing him. He says he had had no dealings with Jesús Gil, but that in the 1990s he had asked his lawyer, Héctor Díaz-Bastién, to legally notify Señor Gil to withdraw the video for his political campaign for re-election as mayor of Marbella because it included images of the actor without consent or authorisation having been given. The demand was met. He denies having any dealings with Gil, Roca and Julián Muñoz, and says he never went to Gil’s offices at Marbella Town Hall. He also states that he obtained no benefit from the agreements under investigation.
With regard to Malibu, he says that withdrew from the company in the 1980s, when he transferred the property to his wife, and that he has never been linked with the other company in any way.
He also denies carrying out any town planning operations in Marbella and in answer to one of the questions he refutes claims that he had been to the Property Registry office and given gifts to the employees.