# DP 1901/2026 — procedural-identity source closure from June/July primary and contemporaneous records

**Control date:** 19 September 2026 (18 September source closure, strengthened by clearer paper copies and contemporaneous-email recheck)  
**Status:** SOURCE-CLOSURE ADDENDUM / REF. 21 → DP 1901 CONTEMPORANEOUSLY CORROBORATED / OFFICIAL REPARTO CERTIFICATION OUTSTANDING  
**Purpose:** preserve the strongest presently located evidence about the relationship between the 18 June judge-related filing (daily reference 24), the 25 June private-actor filing (daily reference 21), and DP 1901/2026.

## Evidential rule

This record separates:

1. **stamped presentation evidence** — proves physical presentation/label/content shown on the face of the source;
2. **official ATLANTE/court records** — prove the fields actually displayed by the official source;
3. **contemporaneous correspondence** — proves what was being reported/understood at the time, but is not a substitute for a certified reparto/index;
4. **later court acts** — prove how the court later characterised DP 1901.

No source below, alone or in combination, proves intentional misrouting, improper joinder, prosecutorial misconduct, judicial prevarication or coordination.

## Hash-locked connected source set

The original images remain in connected private custody and are not committed publicly because the originals contain presentation/private-data fields. Their byte identities are fixed here.

| Date | Source | SHA-256 | What the visible source establishes | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 Jun 2026 | stamped AC complaint cover, source filename `1000096476.jpg` | `c377ecb9a0a7a83c9b6b62ac6009affb27e26da61a33eb92d25b3b8c7bcd3b7d` | separate complaint concerning the Administrador Concursal; Decanato stamp 18 Jun; handwritten daily reference 22 | does not by itself prove later DP 1956 allocation |
| 18 Jun 2026 | stamped judge-complaint cover, source filename `1000096477.jpg` | `2f9b7015598094c68f6408b68a776073de1d7d2fa248169be46fd57bf3bad6c3` | separate complaint/notitia criminis concerning Alberto López Villarrubia; addressed to Sala Civil y Penal TSJC; Decanato stamp 18 Jun; handwritten daily reference 24 | does not prove TSJC receipt/admission or later DP allocation |
| 25 Jun 2026 | stamped private-actor complaint cover, source filename `20260625_105537.jpg` | `8ee03884d32b6b3d9e8377a646eca3d79a7ae199aebc8cc378a9180ba2aef846` | autonomous complaint against five private actors; Decanato stamp 25 Jun; handwritten daily reference 21 | presentation reference is not a DP/NIG |
| 25 Jun 2026 | stamped dependent judge supplement, source filename `20260625_105552.jpg` | `724caf532c25159ead6ae4cfd88c21acbc2d1f202e2bc08cfd713ad07c0376f1` | 13-page “APORTACIÓN COMPLEMENTARIA AUTOSUFICIENTE — CONTROL 24”; expressly requests joinder to the 18-Jun daily-reference-24 judge complaint and states autonomy from the other complaint lane | proves intended joinder, not that Decanato/court electronically effected it |
| 9 Jul 2026 | ATLANTE “Listado de certificaciones para información al ciudadano”, source filename `Atlantes GM 9JUL2026.jpeg` | `af51c3fd744eae415a5818543e996f656709552b3b3c1c0750c31f7403274042` | Gil Marer shown as denunciante in DP 1901/2026, Plaza 6, and DP 1956/2026, Plaza 1 | ATLANTE image does **not** identify defendants/subject matter |
| 9 Jul 2026 | stamped private-actor amplification cover, source filename `Ampliacion Proc.1901-2026 (CAM et al) 09JUL2026.jpeg` | `dfad6f405b7a2ec047a98a7183a9cbfd0698427d3925d02b2a50b4de76de8f71` | Decanato-stamped 9-Jul filing expressly identifies Plaza 6, Diligencias Previas 1901/2026, and an amplification/documentary contribution | proves tender under DP 1901, not electronic incorporation, judicial reading or proper original allocation |

## Chronology that materially narrows the collision

### 18 June — two different complaint packages existed from inception

The two stamped presentation covers establish separate packages:
- daily reference **22**: Administrador Concursal complaint;
- daily reference **24**: judge/judicial-conduct complaint addressed to the TSJC Civil/Criminal Chamber and expressly framed as denuncia/notitia criminis.

This excludes any reconstruction in which references 22 and 24 were merely alternate labels for one filing.

### 25 June — a third autonomous complaint was filed, while the judge supplement remained separately identified

The stamped private-actor cover establishes a new autonomous five-private-actor filing under daily reference **21**.

The separate 13-page stamped supplement expressly says it is to be joined to the **18 June daily-reference-24 judge complaint**. This excludes treating the supplement as an amplification of daily reference 21 or 22.

A contemporaneous email sent at **11:23 on 25 June to Procuradora María Díaz Vecino** records that Gil had just filed a **third, autonomous and separate private-actor complaint under daily reference 21**, attached its stamped cover for tracking, and separately filed the dependent Ref. 24 supplement. The same email reports Ref. 24 still at Decanato and not yet remitted. This is contemporaneous evidence of the filing identity and Gil's understanding on the filing day; it is not a substitute for the court's certified electronic reparto log.

### 9 July — private-actor material was physically tendered under DP 1901 / Plaza 6

The ATLANTE image officially displays:
- DP 1901/2026 — Plaza 6 — Gil Marer as denunciante;
- DP 1956/2026 — Plaza 1 — Gil Marer as denunciante.

The ATLANTE image itself does not label either proceeding by defendant or subject.

Separately, the stamped 9-Jul cover proves that an amplification/documentary contribution concerning the private-actor lane was physically presented **for DP 1901/2026, Plaza 6**.

Contemporaneous correspondence to the procuradora and counsel describes the operational understanding at that time as:
- 1901: CAM/private/Community complaint;
- 1956: AC complaint.

The 9-Jul email to counsel is more specific than the earlier summary: it records `1901: Contra CAM y otras partes de la Comunidad de Propietarios` and `1956: Contra la AC`. A same-day email to the procuradora records that Gil had returned personally to the Decanato, tendered the CAM/private-actor amplification and was supplied an ATLANTE copy showing the two already-opened matters. These are contemporaneous party/counsel communications and therefore evidence of the operational understanding then being acted on; they remain distinct from a certified initiating/reparto record.

### 10–12 July — contemporaneous court-contact account and the signed providencia diverge in subject characterisation

A contemporaneous 12-Jul email to counsel reports that Gil had returned to **Juzgado de Instrucción n.º 6** regarding “la denuncia contra CAM y la CP” identified as 1901/2026; staff reportedly confirmed a providencia existed, would be made available once signed and would give traslado to Fiscalía.

The signed paper providencia now re-photographed on 19-Sep identifies the same DP 1901/NIG/IUP, is electronically signed by Luis Francisco Galván Mesa on 12-Jul-2026, and formally sends the admission question to Ministerio Fiscal for five days **in relation to DIP 2/2026**. Gil states that a paper copy was made available informally by the court office while he was following DP 1901 as the CAM/private-actor matter; no formal service/receipt is inferred from that account.

The email chain is contemporaneous evidence of the filing identity and operational mapping, not an official electronic reparto certificate. Read together, the 25 June email to Procuradora María Díaz Vecino, the stamped Ref. 21 cover, the 9 July private-actor tender under DP 1901 and the 9 July correspondence expressly recording `1901: Contra CAM y otras partes de la Comunidad de Propietarios` materially corroborate Gil's firsthand statement that Ref. 21 became DP 1901. The signed providencia controls as to its own 12 July text. What remains uncertified is the court's internal electronic creation/association event trail and the later mechanism by which the Ref. 24 judge material came to be treated within DP 1901.

### 14 September — the later Auto expressly characterises DP 1901 as alleged judicial prevaricación

The 14-Sep Auto states that DP 1901 was opened on Gil Marer's complaint for alleged prevaricación, records a 29-Jul Fiscal report seeking archive, and orders sobreseimiento libre/archive.

## What is now materially stronger

The source set now supports all of the following without relying on hindsight:

1. the 18-Jun judge complaint and 25-Jun private-actor complaint were autonomous filings;
2. the 25-Jun judge supplement expressly belonged to daily reference 24;
3. private-actor material was physically tendered under DP 1901/Plaza 6 on 9 Jul;
4. contemporaneous July communications treated DP 1901 operationally as the CAM/private/Community lane;
5. the official 12-Jul providencia nevertheless linked DP 1901 to DIP 2/2026;
6. the 14-Sep Auto later characterised DP 1901 as alleged judicial prevaricación;
7. the July record now contains a source-to-source state transition: contemporaneous private-actor identification immediately before an official DIP2-linked providencia, with no produced bridge act explaining the change.

This establishes a materially asymmetric evidential position: **Ref. 21 → DP 1901 is the complainant's firsthand chronology and is contemporaneously corroborated by the 25 June procuradora email and 9 July operational mapping; the later Ref. 24 → DP 1901 association mechanism remains unexplained in the produced official record.**

## What remains unproved

The source set still does **not** independently certify:

- the exact court-system creation/reparto event that converted the Ref. 21 intake into DP 1901/NIG/IUP;
- when, by whom and under what recorded authority the separate Ref. 24 judge material was later associated with, joined to, reassigned into or otherwise treated within DP 1901;
- whether that later treatment resulted from a formal joinder/reassignment/segregation act, an administrative association, another lawful procedural mechanism or an error; or
- any improper intent, manipulation or criminal responsibility arising from that event history.

Therefore the canonical state is:

**REF21_TO_DP1901_CONTEMPORANEOUSLY_CORROBORATED — OFFICIAL_REPARTO_AND_REF24_ASSOCIATION_HISTORY_OUTSTANDING.**

This permits the repository to state that Gil filed the autonomous private-actor complaint on 25 June under daily reference 21 and that his contemporaneous record treated that complaint as the matter that became DP 1901. The source set does **not** prove the exact court-system creation/reparto event or the precise later Ref. 24 association mechanism; those remain authority-controlled production targets. It does **not** permit the repository to claim that it has independently inspected or certified the court's electronic creation/reparto event or the precise later act that associated the judge-related material with DP 1901.

## Residual authority-only production required

To close the remaining official event-history gap, obtain:

1. the exact initiating document that generated DP 1901/NIG/IUP;
2. certified Decanato/reparto records for daily references 21 and 24;
3. complete certified DP 1901 electronic docket/index;
4. ingestion/electronic-incorporation record for the 9-Jul private-actor amplification;
5. every act of joinder, reassignment, accumulation, remisión or segregation;
6. the exact electronic corpus/index sent to Ministerio Fiscal before the 29-Jul report;
7. the signed 29-Jul Fiscal report, author, assignment, reasoning and any review/visado;
8. native/certified 14-Sep Auto and legally operative notification/access metadata;
9. the DP1901 object/subject/party metadata at creation and at 9-Jul, 12-Jul, 29-Jul and 14-Sep, including every user-visible or audit-log change to those fields.

## Litigation consequence

The 14-Sep Auto should not be allowed to acquire an ambiguous scope over an unidentified procedural corpus. Any response should place **objective identity/provenance of DP 1901 before merits**, and require an express determination of whether the Auto purports to affect any autonomous private-actor complaint.