Explosives Analysis....The Latest Results

The issue of the explosives analysis that I wrote about at the beginning of the trial is still moving forwards, although the final test results are not going to be submitted until the comparative tests on a sample of Titadine have been carried out. Titadine is of course the conspiracy theorists favourite explosive because it has been used on several occasions by ETA, and the sample to be tested is due to come from some Titadine that was being transported by a captured ETA commando.

The latest results that have emerged from the tests show quantitative results on the concentration of dinitrotoluene (DNT) found in the samples tested. DNT is present in almost all of the samples of Goma 2 Eco dynamite that have been tested, and it is present in such a minimal concentration that it suggests contamination of the explosive, rather than the presence of DNT as a component. Goma 2 Eco is the dynamite stolen from a mine in Asturias which has been found at all relevant sites connected to the train bombings.

Despite this clearly established finding, the conspiracy theorists continue to ignore the data showing DNT being present in the Goma 2 Eco sample, or when they don’t ignore it they try to suggest that any contamination must have been deliberate. However, the chess players try to have it both ways, suggesting that the presence of DNT means that another explosive must have been used, and at the same time insinuating that someone has also added it to the Goma 2 Eco. Why anyone would choose to deliberately contaminate the Goma 2 Eco with a substance that is not a recognised component of this same explosive is beyond my comprehension, but bear in mind we are dealing with conspiracy theorist logic here; the normal rules do not apply.

Unfortunately for the followers of the conspiracy theories, the levels of DNT found from the tested samples come nowhere near to the proportion that is needed to equal that found in Titadine, but this small but important detail will not prevent a concerted and noisy attempt to suggest otherwise when the final report is submitted.

READ MORE IN SPANISH:
El País on the quantitive analysis
ABC on the quantitive analysis
The test results - via El Mundo
Desiertos Lejanos - recommended reading on the explosives issue

Escaped....Mohamed Afalah

A Moroccan citizen, Mohamed Afalah is said to have been an active participant in the group that placed the bombs. He fled to Barcelona with Mohamed Belhadj following the explosion in Leganés on the 3rd April 2004. It is now believed he may have died in a suicide attack in Iraq in May 2005.

Escaped....Said Berraj

Said Berraj is a Moroccan citizen. He has been linked to Al Qaeda because of a meeting held in Istanbul in the year 2000. He has been linked both to Jamal Ahmidam, and to Serhane ben Abdelmajid. On the 6th March 2004 he left his home in Madrid, and on the 12th March it is claimed he said he was going to the funeral of his sister in Morocco; the investigation revealed he has no sister.

Escaped....Daoud Ouhnane

Daoud Ouhnane is an Algerian citizen, and he is thought to be one of the group responsible for placing the bombs on the trains. His fingerprints were found on a bag containing detonators that was discovered inside a Renault Kangoo van left near the railway station of Alcalá de Henares on the day of the bombings.

Escaped....Mohamed Belhadj

Mohamed Belhadj is a Moroccan citizen said to be the person who rented the apartment in Leganés where 7 members of the group responsible for the bombings committed suicide. Following this event, Belhadj is alleged to have fled to Barcelona and is later suspected of having passed through Holland.

The Trial....Day 13, March 12th

Day 13 of the trial got off to a slightly chaotic start. The first witness who was due to appear, Mouad Benkhalafa, did not turn up. Next the judge called a protected witness identified as Y-26, but this witness does not speak Spanish well and one of the court interpreters was also absent. In the end, the first witness to testify was Hassan Aglif, whose brother Rachid Aglif is one of the accused. Questioned on Rachid’s connections to Jamal Ahmidam (El Chino), Rachid is accused of being his right hand man, Hassan Aglif responded that this was impossible. He said that he did not know everyone that his brother mixed with, not even Rafá Zouhier who had been friends with Rachid since childhood.

When questioned about meetings allegedly organised by Ahmidam and Serhane ben Abdelmajid (El Tunecino) by the river Alberche, Aglif declared that he thought these meetings were just to celebrate a barbecue by the river. He did acknowledge knowing El Chino, who he said was a regular client of the family butchers shop. He said that he did not think El Chino was a very religious person. The last time he saw him was at the end of January 2004 when he sold him some lambs; El Chino had told him that he would leave them in the house at Morata de Tajuña where the bombs were said to have been prepared.

Next to declare was the witness Y-26 who is the former brother in law of Mouhanned Almallah Dabas. He testified in Spanish, despite having evident problems with the language. The witness testified on meetings which were held at the property in the Madrid street of Virgen del Coro, home of Almallah Dabas and where others of the accused also lived. The meetings at Virgen del Coro were led by El Tunecino. He said the meetings included videos of training camps in Afghanistan, as well as discussion of radical Islamist ideas. He also declared that Almallah Dabas once told him that he would not be happy until the Torres Kio (landmark office buildings in Madrid) were brought down. He said that his brother in law always talked of jihad and made references to Afghanistan and Iraq. Until the 11th March 2004, the two men had a close working relationship, the witness assisted Almallah Dabas with repairs to household equipment. The witness stated that he stopped seeing Almallah Dabas after the bombings because of the way the latter treated his wife, sister of the witness. When asked if he considered his former brother in law to be a radical, he said that he did not; he had been influenced by his friends.

Following witness Y-26 came his sister, the former wife of Mouhannad Almallah Dabas. The witness declared that she had received threats and feared for her life. She confirmed the evidence given by her brother by stating that Almallah Dabas had told her one day that an attack should be carried out against the Torres Kio. The chief judge had not permitted her to hear the evidence given by her brother. This witness had married Almallah Dabas in an invalid ceremony, because the latter used an assumed name. Despite this, they lived as if they were married, and the witness said that Almallah Dabas wanted to have many children so that they could participate in the “jihad”. She also said that she saw radical Islamist videos being shown at the meetings held at Virgen del Coro, and that her “husband” also had videos of Abu Qutada, a cleric linked to Al Qaeda. In the same residence she declared that she once saw a box of books, some of them by Bin Laden, and others about “jihad”. She said that when she talked about this on the telephone to Moutaz Almallah Dabas, brother of Mouhanned, he put the phone down and later told her in person never to discuss such things by telephone because the police could be listening.

This witness also linked Almallah Dabas with El Tunecino, and stated that the couple had lived briefly at El Tunecino’s home before going to live at Virgen del Coro. She said that El Tunecino was a violent person who wanted to go to Iraq. She also said that she had seen her husband with El Chino, and with Rabei Osman el Sayed Ahmed. She denied ever having seen another of the accused, Basel Ghalyoun, in the property at Virgen del Coro.

The final witness to declare on this day was Mouad Benkhalafa, who had not been present when called earlier in the day. Benkhalafa was at one point arrested in connection with the train bombings, but the investigating magistrate decided not to accuse him of participation. As a witness, he was questioned on his work relationship to Basel Ghalyoun, and on the meetings alleged to have been held by the river Alberche. On the latter, the witness admitted having attended one meeting where there was talk of raising funds for Afghanistan, those attending included Mouhanned Almallah Dabas, his brother Moutaz, El Tunecino, Abu Dahdah (said to be leader of Al Qaeda in Spain), Amer Azizi and Ghalyoun. However, the witness maintained that Ghalyoun was not a radical, although he had some “radical thoughts” and believed that the true Muslims were in Bosnia and Afghanistan. The witness said that he did not notice any particular change in Ghalyoun after the train bombings, and that Ghalyoun told him he supposed ETA to be behind the attacks. He also said that he had watched a video on the suffering of Muslims in the world at the home of El Tunecino, Ghalyoun was present too; and that El Tunecino lent him a book about Shia Muslims and an interview with Bin Laden.

READ MORE IN SPANISH:
El Mundo - Hassan Aglif
El Mundo - witness Y-26
El Mundo - ex-wife Almallah Dabas
El Mundo - Mouad Benkhalafa

The Chess Players....Federico Jiménez Losantos

Federico Jiménez Losantos has become a pioneer in Spain of highly politicised right wing talk radio, as well as being almost a world leader in the art of getting well paid for insulting people. His most common target is of course the current Spanish government, but he will also turn his fire on anyone on the right who fails to back his demagogic diatribes. Both the conservative newspaper ABC, and the PP mayor of Madrid, Alberto Ruiz Gallardón, have been subjected to very vicious attacks from Losantos.

His principal platform is his program on the COPE radio station, which is owned by the Catholic church. The continuing support of the church for people like Losantos only serves as further evidence of how certain institutions in Spain never passed through the post-Franco political transition that the rest of Spanish society experienced. As with the case of El Mundo, this is not just about politics, it is also about the battle for audience between different media groups. Losantos is also heavily involved in a right wing web site called Libertad Digital, one of these sites that takes the news issued from more conventional media organisations, gives it the required political spin, and then reissues it.

Losantos is idolised by those who turn out for the anti-government demonstrations that have become such regular events in Madrid, stickers supporting the COPE are almost more common than the official posters of the organisers. He brings comfort to the angry Aznarist right wing of the PP who seek revenge above anything else, not for the Madrid bombings of course, but for the election result that followed.

Memorial To The Victims

Yesterday was the 3rd anniversary of the train bombings, and it saw the unveiling of the monument to the victims that has been erected in Atocha railway station in Madrid. The 11 metre high monument is constructed from thousands of glass bricks. Inside are the names of the 191 people killed in the bombings, and many of the messages that were left at the scenes of the bombings in the days that followed.

The Trial....Day 12, March 7th

Day 12 began with a witness from the police Central Intelligence Unit (UCI in Spanish). This witness, an inspector in the UCI, shed some light on the some of the things we still do not know about concerning the bombings. She testified that her unit did not actually carry out the on site inspections of the places related to the bombings, their job is to analyse the information that is passed to them by other units. The witness is responsible for several reports issues on the established facts of what happened, including the Kangoo van found near to Alcalá railway station, the unexploded bomb discovered in Vallecas police station, genetic profiles from different places, and documentation or digital material recovered from residences used by those accused. She emphasised that the UCI is not responsible for the explosives analysis.

The witness certified that 13 rucksack bombs were placed on the trains, of which 10 exploded, 2 were detonated in controlled explosions by bomb disposal experts, and the 13th was the unexploded device discovered in Vallecas. The police assume from this figure that there were 13 people involved in placing the bombs, amongst them the 7 who committed suicide in the apartment in Leganés. She said that the police were certain that the bombers had used the Kangoo van and another Skoda car, but that they did not rule out the possibility of a third vehicle being used. The UCI believes that those responsible for placing the bombs on the trains travelled to the station of Alcalá de Henares in 3 groups. The witness said they cannot be certain that all of the bombers left from Alcalá, but the presence of the two vehicles suggests that at least some of them did.

On the issue of genetic profiles, the officer testified concerning those that were found in the apartment at Leganés. In addition to the 7 which have been positively identified as belonging to those who died there, she said that there are 3 other profiles that were found. Of these, one has been identified recently as being from Abdelilah Hriz, currently in prison in Morocco but who is now included in the accusation concerning the train bombings. The other two have not been identified, although one of these persons was also in the house in Morata de Tajuña where the bombs were prepared, and in the Skoda car found in Alcalá. The second profile was also identified in the house in Morata, as well as Leganés. In response to questions from the defence lawyer for Mohamed Bouharrat, the witness recognised that there were many unidentified fingerprints from objects in the Leganés apartment. Many of these have been found on books recovered from that apartment.

The second witness to appear is a police officer in the Provincial Information Brigade who was the first officer to make a visual inspection of the Kangoo van found near to Alcalá railway station. This officer has testified that when he looked through the van window he saw many objects mixed together, but nothing that appeared to have sufficient size to contain an explosive device. The witness emphasised that his task at this point was just to make a visual assessment from the exterior. He stated that on the basis of this inspection he believed that the van did not fit with the “modus operandi” used habitually by ETA. This assessment was based on elements common to many ETA actions; the Kangoo had no false number plate, no locks on the doors had been forced, and their seemed to be no device left in the van with the intention of destroying the vehicle and the evidence it might contain. The latter is common practice for ETA.

This officer was also present when an inspection of the van was made by sniffer dogs, an inspection which did not detect the presence of explosives. He also said that he inspected the van from the front and the side windows by the front seats, given that it was not possible to see inside from the rear. Following his inspection of the van he continued with other tasks assigned to him, checking to see whether there were any nearby security cameras that may have recorded something. He was also engaged in seeking witnesses who may be able to provide information about the van, one of these is the caretaker of a nearby building who will declare as a witness in the trial. This person has declared to the police that he saw 3 heavily dressed persons getting out of the van.

The third witness on day 12 was, Abdeldaker Farssaoiu, a police informer more commonly referred to by the name of “Cartagena”. This witness, who was at one point the imam of a mosque in Villaverde, offered a very different testimony in court to that which is contained in his declarations to the police and the investigating magistrate. He claimed that these differences were because he had been blackmailed and threatened by the police; and that his declarations contained what the police told him to say. He declared that he was a police informer because the police had forced him to do it, and the chief judge then forced him to reveal names of officers who he alleged had applied these pressures.

Cartagena told the court about meetings in Villaverde attended by radical Islamists including Serhane ben Abdelmajid (El Tunecino), Mustafá Maymouni and Faissal Alouch. Those present at these meetings would watch videos about Chechenia and Afghanistan, and sermons by radical clerics. Cartagena admitted having told the police that El Tunecino asked in one of these meetings whether those present were prepared to be martyrs for their cause. The witness also made an extraordinary claim linking the police to El Tunecino. He said that one day when he was in the area of Atocha in Madrid, he saw El Tunecino and Said Berraj passing on motor bikes. He decided to follow them, and said that they entered the same cafe where he normally had his contacts with the police. He claims he saw El Tunecino and a police officer seated at the same table.

He also claimed that on the 2 April 2004, when he was living in Almería, he was called by his police contacts saying they needed to see him urgently. He claimed that while he was praying at a mosque the next morning, police officers that he did not know arrived and asked him to accompany them to Madrid. On arrival in Madrid he stated that his usual police contact asked him to go to an apartment in Leganés because El Tunecino was there with some others. Cartagena claims he refused to do it because it would arouse suspicion. The siege of the apartment in Leganés took place on the 3rd April.

Finally, Cartagena claimed that he had documentary proof of the pressures received from the police but that he had voluntarily asked his wife to retrieve the computer disk containing this evidence from the mosque in Almería and destroy it. The witness was warned by the chief judge that he could face charges if his testimony was found to be false.

Footnote:

Cartagena is a continual favourite of the conspiracy theorists, mostly because he links the police with the bombings; but also because his continual changes of evidence give plenty to play with.

READ MORE IN SPANISH:
El Mundo - UCI witness
ABC - Police witness in Alcalá
ABC - Cartagena

The Trial....Day 11, March 6th

The first witness to appear on day 11 of the trial was another police officer from the Central Unit for External Information (UCIE in Spanish). This officer, an inspector specializing in the area of the Maghreb in North Africa, revealed that within 48 hours of the bombings the police were already looking for Serhane ben Abdelmajid (El Tunecino). The inspector recognised that El Tunecino was known to the police and that they were aware of his strong influence over a group of radical Muslims. When the police arrived at the residence of El Tunecino on the 13th March 2004, it soon became evident to them that there was nobody there. The owner, who lived in the same building, informed them that El Tunecino had always paid his rent on time until March. The absence of El Tunecino put the police on alert for his possible involvement in the bombings.

In the case of the man accused of being the operational leader of the bombings, Jamal Ahmidam (El Chino), the police went to the house of his brothers on the 26th March 2004. The elder brother, Mustafá, allegedly told the police that he had sharply criticised Jamal for his involvement in the bombings, and that El Chino had replied to him that “more than 200 people die in Palestine and Iraq, and nobody cares”. This police witness also referred to Rifaat Anouar who died alongside El Tunecino and El Chino in the Leganés suicide. He said that a friend of Anouar gave the police valuable information, and that Anouar had eventually moved to the residence in the Madrid street of Virgen del Coro which was shared by some of the others accused. The phrase pronounced by this witness that has perhaps had most resonance in the media has been “The great problem was that we were always one step behind them”.

The following witness was also an officer from the UCIE, identified by the number 87561. This witness provided the court with details of some of the first steps in the investigation that followed the discovery of the telephone used as a timer in the unexploded bomb that was found amongst personal effects in a police station in Vallecas, Madrid. This witness stated that he participated in the detention of the Indian owners of the shop, Bazar Top, where this telephone was sold. The prosecution alleges that on the 3rd March 2004, a man bought three telephones like the one found in the unexploded bomb from this shop, and ordered six more for the following day. According to one of the owners of the shop, the man buying the phones, and another who accompanied him, spoke in a strange language and when he asked them what it was, they replied “Bulgaria”.

This witness also testified that he participated in several interrogations of those accused of participating in the bombings, and house searches including those of Saed el Harrak and Hamid Ahmidam. He said that in the latter’s home they discovered a telephone card linked to some of the Leganés suicides. In the case of El Harrak, documentation was discovered which linked him to the group responsible. The witness also talked of the connection between Nasredine Bousbaa and El Chino, Bousbaa being accused of having falsified passports which were found in the wreckage of the Leganés apartment.

The final witness to appear on day 11 was an analyst from the Elcano Royal Institute, Haizam Amirah Fernández. This witness testified about a document that was posted on the internet in December 2003, and which called for “painful blows” to be struck against Spain before the March 2004 elections. Fernández testified that the document was prepared by someone who knew well the Spanish political situation, and who knew that public opinion was against the intervention in Iraq.

Footnote:
The court authorised the testing of a sample of Titadine dynamite captured from an ETA commando less than two weeks before the Madrid bombings. The ongoing explosives tests were supposed to conclude with tests on a sample from the French manufacturer, but it appears that the factory is now closed. Expect the conspiracy theorists to get excited about this prospect, although it is unlikely to bring them any satisfactory results. Anything which raises even the slightest possibility of Titadine having been used causes this excitement, because it is an explosive frequently used by ETA.

READ MORE IN SPANISH:

ABC - First Witness UCIE

El Mundo - First Witness UCIE

El Mundo - Second Witness UCIE

ABC - Witness Elcano Institute

Killed In Leganés....Allekema Lamari

Allekema Lamari was an Algerian citizen. He had been arrested previously for offences related to Islamist terrorism, but was able to walk free because of a judicial error. DNA traces have been found linking him to the Kangoo van found near to the railway station in Alcalá de Henares on the day of the train bombings.

Killed In Leganés....Rifaat Anouar Asrih

Rifaat Anouar Asrih was a Moroccan citizen. DNA traces have been found linking him to the house in Morata de Tajuña where the bombs were prepared, to the Kangoo van found near the railway station of Alcalá de Henares on the day of the bombings, and to the explosive device found on the high speed rail line connecting Madrid and Seville on the 2nd April 2004.

Killed In Leganés....Abdennabi Kounjaa

Abdennabi Kounjaa was a Moroccan citizen, and is said to have participated in transporting the explosive for the bombs from Asturias to Madrid. In addition there is DNA evidence linking him to the house in Morata de Tajuña where the bombs are said to have been prepared, and also to clothing found abandoned near to the train station of Vicálvaro on the same line used by the trains carrying the bombs. He was a workmate of Saed el Harrak, one of those accused in the trial.

Killed In Leganés....Rachid Oulad Akcha

A Moroccan citizen, Rachid Oulad Akcha is said to have been one of the group that carried out the bombings. The prosecution alleges that he was in the house where the bombs were prepared during February 2004, and that he participated together with his brother Mohamed Oulad Akcha in the acquisition and transport of the explosives used in the bombs.

Killed In Leganés....Mohamed Oulad Akcha

A Moroccan citizen, Mohamed Oulad Akcha is suspected of having been a key associate of Jamal Ahmidam, and of having been one of the group who carried out the train bombings. He is also said to have been a participant in the acquisition and transport of the explosives used in the bombs. He is the brother of Rachid Oulad, who died with him in the explosion in Leganés.

Killed In Leganés....Jamal Ahmidam

Another of those regarded as being the principal organisers of the train bombings, Jamal Ahmidam was a Moroccan citizen, although because of his appearance he was known as "El Chino". He is said to have been the person behind the purchase of the explosives used in the bombs. In a video tape discovered in the wreckage of thhe Leganés apartment where he committed suicide with six others, El Chino is seen reading a document where he threatened further attacks if the Spanish government did not withdraw its troops from Iraq and Afghanistan within a week.

Killed In Leganés....Serhane Ben Abdelmajid

A Tunisian citizen, and for this reason almost universally referred to as "El Tunecino", Serhane ben Abdelmajid is regarded as one of the principal organisers of the train bombings. He originally came to Spain in 1996 as a student, and later worked in construction and in an estate agency. Accused of being a close associate of Abu Dahdah, imprisoned for being a leader of Al-Qaeda in Spain.

The Trial....Day 10, March 5th

Day 10 of the trial commenced with the continuing declaration by the chief inspector of the police Central External Information Unit (UCIE). This officer testified on how the police identified the house in Morata de Tajuña where it is alleged that the bombs for the trains were prepared. He talso estified that the principal clue leading them to the house came from the discovery that the cards used in the bombs were activated inside the range of the mobile phone antenna for Morata, and that two other cards used by Jamal Ahmidam had also been activated in this area. Questioned on whether his unit was aware of information allegedly passed by Rafá Zouhier to his controllers in the Guardia Civil, the witness said that his department never received any information on this.

The officer stated that the house in Morata originally came to the attention of his unit in September 2002, at the time it was being used by Mustafá Maymouni, currently held in prison in Morocco for possible involvement in terrorist attacks in Casablanca. He stated that the cell led by Maymouni began to fall apart as a result of increased police pressure following the 11th September 2001 attack in New York. He testified that with the departure from Spain of Maymouni the leadership of the group was assumed by Driss Chebli, detained in 2004 in another operation, and Serhane ben Abdelmajid (El Tunecino, killed in Leganés). At one point the police requested authorization to tap a telephone belonging to El Tunecino, but in the end the suspect never used this phone. The witness said that El Tunecino and the brothers Moutaz and Mouhanned Almallah were being investigated by police in Madrid by the end of 2003. The house in Morata was rented by Jamal Ahmidam in January of 2004. On the question of why Spain was singled out for the attack, he expressed his opinion that the country was seen as the "weakest link" of the three countries who launched the invasion of Iraq at the meeting in the Azores.

The appearance of the second witness to testify, an inspector of the UCIE identified only by the number 81572, entered into details of the investigation in great detail with much of the testimony based on the study of telephone call records. Some of his testimony focused on the role of Hassan el Haski, accused of being one of the intellectual authors of the attacks, and also of being a leading figure in the Moroccan Islamic Combat Group (MIGC). The witness referred to statements made by another member of the group, Attila Turk, that El Haski arrived in France a few days before the Madrid bombings and asked to be accommodated in a secure place because “something could happen”. Additionally, according to this witness, El Haski revealed after the bombings that he knew Jamal Zougam, accused of being one of those who actually carried out the attacks. This witness claimed that the MIGC infrastructure in different European countries helped the fugitives Mohamed Afalah, Youssef Belhadj, and Abdelmajid Bouchar to escape after the bombings. The unit to which this police witness belongs specialises in Islamist terrorism, and it was not until the 17th March that they took charge of the investigation.

Footnote:

The chief judge of the tribunal yesterday acted to prevent lawyers who are supposedly participating as representatives of parties to the accusation, from raising issues related to the conspiracy theories. This affects those lawyers representing victims associations close to the promotors of the conspiracy theories. The judge made it clear that legally they must either support the accusation or withdraw from the process. He also quashed questions from a defence lawyer based on an El Mundo story claiming the police had no authorisation to examine registers of telephone calls in their search for evidence. The judge ruled that no special legal authorisation was required for them to do this.


READ MORE IN SPANISH:

ABC - Witness 1

El País - Witness 1

ABC - Witness 2

We Want To Know....Free The Madrid 29!

Free the Madrid 29! This is a slogan that none of us have heard being shouted on the streets of Spain’s capital city, nor have we seen it on posters pasted onto the walls of buildings around the city. Yet it is another curious feature of those who so loudly proclaim that the real perpetrators of the Madrid bombings are not those who have been formally accused, that at no point do they ever call for the release of those who are currently on trial and who face considerable jail terms if found guilty.

The general attitude of supporters of the conspiracy theories towards those who have been arrested and accused of committing the bombings is almost always condescending, and frequently racist. Most of the accused are referred to as “los moritos” (the little Moors), a description which focuses on their origin, but which is also intended to suggest that none of them are significant enough to have possibly carried out such a major attack. So there we have the paradox, how can it be that people who claim to believe the true authors of the attacks are still free do nothing to campaign for the release of those, who by the same criteria, must surely be innocent of the charges they face?

Why? ¡Quiero saber!

The Trial....Day 9, March 1st

Day nine of the trial was the last day of the opening phase, ending the initial declarations of those accused and beginning the second phase of appearances by witnesses. The accused who testified on this day were all related to the group from Asturias who the prosecution alleges to be the providers of the stolen explosive used in the train bombings.

First to appear was Raúl González who worked in the Conchita mine from where it is said the explosive was stolen. González has testified on how easy it was to remove dynamite from the mine. It was not stored in specially protected places, but simply left in the open air in the areas where it was needed. Detonators were stored in locked deposits, but the key was left by the miners under a stone. González testified that anyone could enter the mine and that he never saw a member of the Guardia Civil at the mine. He worked at the mine until December 2003 and is accused of having passed explosives to Emilio Suárez Trashorras in exchange for drugs. González denied this, saying that he bought drugs every week from Trashorras and never exchanged anything else in return for these drugs.

According to González there was no external control of the explosives, or any special security, even at weekends. Boxes of dynamite containing 25 kilos each of explosive were left open, and detonators that had not been used were left in the mine rather than returned to the deposit. He made it clear that anyone with some knowledge of the mine could enter and remove explosives and detonators, and that control was tightened only after the train bombings occurred. The interrogation of the accused was accompanied by audiovisual evidence showing pictures and film of explosives and detonators at the mine. Of the other accused he admitted to knowing only Trashorras and Emilio Llano, who also worked at the mine.

It was Llano, responsible for control of the explosives at the mine, who was the next to testify. Under questioning he defended his work at the mine, although he admitted that he trusted the word of the miners concerning the amount of explosives they had used, and did not check whether these explosives were entirely used or not. He claimed that this was the way things had always been done at the mine, he maintained written records of the explosives required by the miners, and the book where the record was maintained was shown to the Guardia Civil once a month. On general security at the mine he said there were no daily checks of everything, and that the Guardia Civil made checks two or three times a month.

After Llano came Iván Granados, whose testimony has been unusual for the trial so far in that he did directly incriminate someone else. Granados testified that on the night of the 23rd January 2004, he was asked by Emilio Suárez Trashorras if he would be prepared to transport a bag of explosives. He claims that he refused to do this, and that since then he had no further contact with Trashorras. Granados has also declared that Gabriel Montoya, the minor already convicted of transporting explosives for the bombs, told him that we was going to transport a rucksack of dynamite to Madrid, and that he had accompanied a group of North Africans to the mine. Granados claimed that he had never transported explosives himself.

Granados points the finger

The next accused to appear was Sergio Álvarez who testified that he got to know Trashorras via another friend and co-accused, Iván Reis. He said that he was asked by Trashorras to transport a heavy, locked sports bag to Madrid; he claims that Trashorras told him it contained pirate compact discs. He said he was to be paid 600 euros by Trashorras to transport the bag on the 5th January 2004, and that Trashorras told him to be very careful that the bag was not stolen. Álvarez claimed that at no time was he aware that he might be carrying explosives; the bag was transported in the luggage compartment of a bus. At the exit of the bus station in Madrid he was met by someone driving a BMW car, at the time he did not know who this was but after the train attacks he was able to identify the person who collected the bag as Jamal Ahmidam, “El Chino”. He claims that on returning to Asturias he was given some hashish by Trashorras, but that he never received the 600 euros he had been promised. He also stated that he avoided further contact with Trashorras after being told by Iván Reis that he had also transported a bag to Madrid, and that it contained hashish. He also testified that a friend told him he had seen a BMW car very similar to that which he saw in Madrid, but this time the car was in Avilés, he supposed that this could be the same car.

Álvarez was followed by Iván Reis, who testified that he did not know that a sports bag which he took to Madrid on January 9th 2004 contained explosives. He claimed that Trashorras had told him the bag contained hashish in bad condition that had to be returned, in return for taking the bag Reis would settle a debt he owed to Antonio Toro and in addition was promised 300 euros. He claims that Trashorras and Toro threatened him with a pistol to get him to make the journey, and that on the day he was taken to the bus station in Oviedo by Trashorras, it was the latter who put the bag into the luggage compartment of the bus. On arrival in Madrid he was met by someone who he later identified as being Jamal Ahmidam, El Chino. He alleges that El Chino took the bag and demanded an envelope containing money in addition; when Reis showed he was carrying nothing else he says that El Chino stole his wallet and mobile phone. Following this he said that he spoke to Trashorras who reassured him that he would sort this out when El Chino came to Avilés soon after.

The last of the 29 accused to appear was Javier González Díaz, who denied that he accompanied Trashorras to the Conchita mine or that he kept watch while the other man entered with the intention of stealing dynamite. He also denied knowing that Trashorras was involved in explosives trafficking. González has been accused by Gabriel Montoya of making the visit to the mine with Trashorras, but the accused claims that he was incriminated by Montoya because the latter had been accused in turn by González of stealing his car. He said that he knew Trashorras via Montoya, and that he began to work with him in buying and selling cars as he is a mechanic by profession.

González admitted having travelled with Trashorras to Madrid at the beginning of February 2004, although he claimed to be unaware of where they went because he is unfamiliar with the city. He claims that he remained in the car while Trashorras went somewhere else for a period of about 45 minutes. He also said he made a second journey to Madrid at the beginning of March 2004 at the request of Montoya's mother to find her son following a traffic accident.

González was the last of those accused to testify, and there was still some time on day nine for the next phase of witness testimonies to begin. The first witness to appear, 682 have been called in total, was a chief inspector from the police Central Unit for External Information (UCIE). The anonymous agent, identified only by the number 18,403, appeared behind a curtain to guarantee his security. On the 11th March 2004 he was responsible for a section dedicated to everything relating to North Africa, and received instructions to seek any information concerning what had happened, and why.

He stated that the very high risk of another attack made it an absolute priority to find those behind the bombings. Things began to move, he said, with the discovery of a Renault Kangoo van on the afternoon of the 11th March close to the railway station at Alcalá de Henares. In this van the police discovered some traces of Goma 2 Eco, the explosive used in the bombs. At the end of the same day came the news of a claim of responsibility made in the name of the "Abu Hafs Al Arabi Brigades" in a British arabic language newspaper.

He explained that on the 13th March, the telephone card recovered from the only unexploded bomb led the police to the shop in the Madrid district of Lavapies owned by Jamal Zougam. The witness said that at this point there was still no certainty on authorship of the bombings, but most of the evidence pointed to Islamist responsibility. He recognised that initially the police were also taking into account the possibility of ETA being responsible, partly because of the interception less than two weeks before of a bomb being transported towards Madrid by ETA members.

This officer stated that the police took seriously the possibility of Islamist attacks both because of threats from Osama Bin Laden, and also because of events such as the attacks took place in Casablanca. He said that the level of alert had been raised and the number of officers attached to his unit had increased. At this point in his testimony the session was brought to a close.

READ MORE IN SPANISH:
El Mundo - Raúl González
El Mundo - Emilio Llano
El Mundo - Iván Granados
El Mundo - Sergio Álvarez
El Mundo - Iván Reis
El Mundo - Javier González
El Mundo - police witness 18,403