{ "schema": "por-derecho.expert-evidence-status.v2", "generated_on": "2026-08-25", "status": "controlling_structured_register", "supersedes": "assets/data/david-espejo-expert-evidence-v1.json", "subject": { "name": "David Espejo Navarro", "firm": "Expert Witness Forensic & Compliance (eXW)", "legal_entity_public_notice": "Four Mirror Advisors, S.L.", "role": "party forensic-economic expert; later testigo-perito in the classification section", "relationship_thesis": "professional_first_not_professional_only", "relationship_note": "The documented professional workstream dates back at least to 2016. Later correspondence also reflects a cordial or professional-networking dimension; that later dimension does not decide authorship, independence, filing or evidential weight." }, "scope": [ "Concurso 36/2012", "valuation and liquidation", "Owners' Community and CEXP", "financing, swap and pledged deposit", "classification section", "report version and custody control", "hearing access and audiovisual preservation", "connected parallel tracks" ], "status_vocabulary": { "client_contribution": "Material supplied to the expert; not an expert conclusion unless authorship is independently established.", "draft": "The located copy identifies itself as draft or lacks matched final/signature evidence.", "signed_final": "A final or signed version is located.", "transmitted": "Transmission is documented; transmission alone is not court filing.", "selected_as_annex": "Counsel or a pleading identifies the document as an annex to a defined filing.", "court_filed": "A filing receipt, official bundle, docket entry or judicial source confirms incorporation into a defined court file.", "court_cited": "A judicial decision or official hearing record expressly refers to or uses the report.", "author_reported_filed": "The author later recalled that the item was filed; independent court-file confirmation remains required.", "court_confirmed_role": "A court-originating source confirms the person's procedural role.", "unresolved": "The available source set does not support a definitive proposition." }, "publication_controls": [ "Do not collapse creation, signature, custody, transmission, receipt, annex selection, filing, timeliness and judicial use.", "Do not label an item extemporaneous unless the applicable deadline and actual filing or service date establish lateness.", "Do not describe the court-supplied optical medium as corrupt, defective, manipulated or incomplete on the located record.", "Do not state that Espejo definitely testified without reviewing the filed versions; the precise pre-evidence review position remains unresolved.", "Do not state that all four signed final reports were four separate annexes to LPB's April 2019 opposition.", "Do not state that the two other signed finals were never used or filed elsewhere.", "Do not equate the retrospectively mentioned May economic note with the 10 May valuation draft without an exact document match.", "Do not allege audiovisual manipulation, deletion or incompleteness without originals, metadata, hashes and/or a certified court copy.", "Do not publish private contacts, fees, family information, privileged strategy or complete restricted reports without separate clearance.", "Expert evidence is not adjudication and does not by itself establish misconduct, knowledge, causation, liability or criminal intent." ], "reports": [ { "report_id": "DES-2018-05-04-CLIENT-BRIEFING", "date": "2018-05-04", "public_title_es": "Antecedentes dirigidos a David Espejo", "public_title_en": "Background materials addressed to David Espejo", "exact_filename": null, "version_status": "client_contribution", "signature_status": "not_applicable", "custody_status": "client_and_adviser_working_material", "filing_status": "unresolved", "judicial_use": "not_established", "public_limit": "Do not cite as an independent eXW conclusion unless expert authorship is established." }, { "report_id": "DES-2018-05-10-VALUATION-LIQUIDATION-DRAFT", "date": "2018-05-10", "public_title_es": "Valoración del complejo y razonabilidad del plan de liquidación", "public_title_en": "Complex valuation and liquidation-plan reasonableness", "exact_filename": "Análisis valoración del Complejo en el ámbito del plan de liquidación del Concurso 2.pdf", "version_status": "draft", "signature_status": "not_matched_to_signed_final", "custody_status": "working_copy_located", "filing_status": "unresolved", "author_later_recollection": "A May economic note appeared not to have been filed.", "exact_match_to_later_recollection": "unresolved", "notice_significance": "Ex-ante evidence that valuation and liquidation objections were being documented before 7 June 2018; it does not itself prove each underlying notice, recipient or receipt." }, { "report_id": "DES-2018-06-11-CEXP-RIGHTS", "date": "2018-06-11", "public_title_es": "Nota económica sobre derechos frente a la CEXP", "public_title_en": "Economic note on rights against the CEXP", "exact_filename": "Nota Económica derechos contra la CEXP Def.pdf", "version_status": "signed_final", "signature_status": "signed_final_delivered_2019", "source_discrepancy": "The cover states Concurso Voluntario nº 32/2012; the body and context concern LPB's Concurso 36/2012. Preserve and explain the discrepancy.", "filing_status": "court_filed", "april_2019_annex": "document 3", "judicial_use": "court_cited", "judicial_use_note": "The later judgment identifies and uses the document 3 Espejo opinion in the CEXP/credit analysis.", "source_locators": [ "gmail:16a4a411f8c2206c", "gmail:16a4ba1d9bc2fb78", "repository:archive/DAVID_ESPEJO_EXPERT_WITNESS_DEEP_EVIDENCE_RECONSTRUCTION_20AUG2026.md" ] }, { "report_id": "DES-2018-07-10-COMMUNITY-DEBT", "date": "2018-07-10", "public_title_es": "Razonabilidad de la deuda de la Comunidad de Propietarios", "public_title_en": "Reasonableness of the Owners' Community debt", "exact_filename": "Análisis de razonabilidad de deuda Def.pdf", "version_status": "signed_final", "signature_status": "signed_final_delivered_2019", "filing_status": "not_separately_annexed_in_located_april_2019_opposition", "other_use_or_filing": "unresolved", "public_limit": "The located opposition does not prove that this report was never filed, used or cited elsewhere.", "source_locators": [ "gmail:16a4a411f8c2206c", "gmail:16a4a69a3c17d288", "repository:archive/DAVID_ESPEJO_EXPERT_WITNESS_DEEP_EVIDENCE_RECONSTRUCTION_20AUG2026.md" ] }, { "report_id": "DES-2018-SWAP-PLEDGED-DEPOSIT", "date": "2018", "public_title_es": "Vinculación swap, financiación y depósito pignorado", "public_title_en": "Swap, financing and pledged-deposit linkage", "exact_filename": "Vinculación Swap Cobertura vs Financiación Caja de Canarias Sun Park Def..pdf", "version_status": "signed_final", "signature_status": "signed_final_delivered_2019", "filing_status": "court_filed", "april_2019_annex": "document 5", "judicial_use": "court_cited", "judicial_use_note": "The later judgment expressly uses document 5 when analysing the swap and pledged-deposit package and does not uphold culpability on that particular ground.", "source_locators": [ "gmail:16a4a411f8c2206c", "gmail:16a4ba1d9bc2fb78", "repository:archive/DAVID_ESPEJO_EXPERT_WITNESS_DEEP_EVIDENCE_RECONSTRUCTION_20AUG2026.md" ] }, { "report_id": "DES-2018-GENERAL-ECONOMIC-NOTE", "date": "2018", "public_title_es": "Nota económica general", "public_title_en": "General economic note", "exact_filename": "Nota Económica Def.pdf", "version_status": "signed_final", "signature_status": "signed_final_delivered_2019", "filing_status": "not_separately_annexed_in_located_april_2019_opposition", "other_use_or_filing": "unresolved", "public_limit": "Do not equate this item automatically with every later reference to a May economic note without a version match.", "source_locators": [ "gmail:16a4a411f8c2206c", "gmail:16a4a69a3c17d288", "gmail:1898367d3957a002" ] } ], "events": [ { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2016-2017-PROFESSIONAL-WORKSTREAM", "date_range": "2016-2017", "event_type": "professional_relationship", "status": "documented", "proposition": "A professional expert/economic workstream predates the 2018 reports and later networking correspondence.", "limit": "Not a filing index and not proof that the relationship remained exclusively professional at every later point." }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2019-04-23-FOUR-SIGNED-FINALS", "date": "2019-04-23", "event_type": "signed_final_delivery", "status": "documented", "proposition": "Four signed final reports were delivered to the client/adviser perimeter.", "source_locators": ["gmail:16a4a411f8c2206c", "gmail:16a4a69a3c17d288"] }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2019-04-23-COUNSEL-SELECTION", "date": "2019-04-23", "event_type": "annex_selection", "status": "documented", "proposition": "Counsel stated that two Espejo reports had been replaced with the signed versions in the working opposition bundle.", "source_locators": ["gmail:16a4ba1d9bc2fb78"] }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2019-04-23-CLIENT-AUTHORISATION", "date": "2019-04-23", "event_type": "client_instruction", "status": "documented", "proposition": "The client authorised counsel to present the pleading.", "limit": "Client instruction is not itself a filing receipt.", "source_locators": ["gmail:16a4bc7eadcf52e6"] }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2019-04-24-LPB-OPPOSITION", "date": "2019-04-24", "event_type": "court_filing", "status": "documented_for_annexes_3_and_5", "proposition": "The located LPB opposition used two separate Espejo annexes: document 3 (CEXP rights/credit) and document 5 (swap/pledged deposit).", "limit": "No broader claim is made about use or filing of the other two signed finals elsewhere." }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2022-2023-COURT-ROLE", "date_range": "2022-03-2023", "event_type": "court_correspondence", "status": "court_confirmed_role", "proposition": "Court correspondence confirms a formal witness-expert participation pathway, including remote-intervention arrangements.", "source_locators": ["gmail:17efc99637c094a4", "gmail:1870d492a640940b"] }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2023-07-AUTHOR-FILING-RECOLLECTION", "date": "2023-07-23", "event_type": "provenance_clarification", "status": "author_recollection", "proposition": "The May economic note appeared not filed; the June economic note was filed.", "limit": "The exact identity of the May item remains unresolved and neither recollection substitutes for the certified docket.", "source_locators": ["gmail:1898367d3957a002"] }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2023-07-24-COURT-FILE-ACCESS", "date": "2023-07-24", "event_type": "version_access", "status": "documented_access_barrier", "proposition": "Espejo reported that his copies did not match the versions contributed to the proceeding and that he had not accessed the optical medium because no reader was available.", "not_proved": [ "the medium was corrupt", "the medium was defective", "the medium was manipulated", "the medium was incomplete", "Espejo definitely gave evidence without later obtaining access" ], "unresolved": "Whether he obtained and reviewed the exact filed versions before giving evidence." }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2023-07-25-WITNESS-EXPERT", "date": "2023-07-25", "event_type": "hearing", "status": "judgment_confirmed", "proposition": "The judgment records Espejo as a testigo-perito at the classification hearing." }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2023-09-28-JUDGMENT-USE", "date": "2023-09-28", "event_type": "judicial_use", "status": "court_cited", "proposition": "The judgment uses document 3 in the CEXP/credit analysis and document 5 in the swap/pledged-deposit analysis; it does not uphold culpability on the latter ground.", "limit": "The overall classification was nevertheless partly culpable on other grounds." }, { "event_id": "DES-EVT-2023-07-RECORDING-REVIEW", "date_range": "2023-07-29/2023-07-30", "event_type": "audiovisual_review_request", "status": "documented_missing_attachment_in_one_request", "proposition": "A later request for Espejo to review the hearing recording initially omitted the recording attachment.", "source_locators": ["gmail:189a5946f839d61d"] } ], "audiovisual_control": { "reported_wall_clock_interval_minutes": 158, "reported_combined_file_runtime_minutes": 116, "raw_difference_minutes": 42, "possible_explanation": "A recess may explain some or all of the raw difference.", "current_status": "unresolved_not_proof_of_manipulation", "required_before_stronger_proposition": [ "original audiovisual files", "metadata", "cryptographic hashes where available", "certified complete court copy or audiovisual index", "recess and off-record chronology" ] }, "open_evidence_tasks": [ { "task_id": "DES-OPEN-01", "task": "Establish whether Espejo obtained and reviewed the exact court-file versions before giving evidence.", "priority": "high" }, { "task_id": "DES-OPEN-02", "task": "Recover and hash the original 25 July 2023 audiovisual files and compare them with a certified court copy or index.", "priority": "high" }, { "task_id": "DES-OPEN-03", "task": "Locate and review the final LPB appeal as regards the 24 July access and recording issue.", "priority": "high" }, { "task_id": "DES-OPEN-04", "task": "Complete a report-by-report SHA-256 version, custody, annex, filing and judicial-citation matrix.", "priority": "high" }, { "task_id": "DES-OPEN-05", "task": "Authenticate any precise historic VIDISPIR linkage before publication as independently verified.", "priority": "medium" }, { "task_id": "DES-OPEN-06", "task": "Move any primary original held only as a working copy into durable source custody.", "priority": "high" } ], "cross_links": { "es": [ "/es/david-espejo-perito-forense/", "/es/cuaderno-juridico/", "/es/concurso-36-2012-columna-judicial/", "/es/calificacion-concurso-36-2012-vidas-paralelas/", "/es/fuente-profesional-2018-conocimiento-concursal/", "/es/comparativa-tasaciones-actua-gesvalt-2018/", "/es/comunidad-instrumentalizacion/", "/es/toma-control-sun-park-7-junio-2018/" ], "en": [ "/en/david-espejo-expert-witness/", "/en/legal-notebook/", "/en/concurso-36-2012-judicial-spine/", "/en/insolvency-classification-parallel-lives/", "/en/2018-professional-source-insolvency-knowledge/", "/en/actua-gesvalt-2018-valuation-comparison/", "/en/community-instrumentalisation/", "/en/sun-park-takeover-7-june-2018/" ] }, "public_page_policy": "Describe sources, provenance and procedural status conservatively. Expert evidence is not a judicial finding and does not by itself establish misconduct, knowledge, causation, liability or criminal intent." }