THE PROJECT ANYONE COULD SEE

Of all the assertions this case came to maintain, the most fragile was also the most central: that the technology project barely existed.

It existed, and it was public. The screenshots incorporated into the file document the development of mildeseos.com online, with records dated up to 30 March 2012 (A.25). It was not code kept in a drawer: it was a published portal, with its domain, its infrastructure and its trace in the historical archives of the internet — the kind of trace no interested party can fabricate retroactively, because it is kept by third parties unconnected to the case.

On that verifiable reality the rest is stacked: the audits that inspected it, the official appraisal of 1,778,000 euros (A.5), the payments released. And against it, a procedural thesis that needed all of that not to have existed. The reader who wishes to act as an expert can do so in two minutes: the historical web archives are public, and the date of each screenshot was not set by the defence.

This is the piece that turns the case into something more uncomfortable than a commercial dispute: a man was not convicted over a non-existent project — a documented, audited and public project was declared non-existent. The order of that operation is exactly the one this story has been describing since the first milestone.