The Peculiar World Of Little Nicholas

The BBC once cottoned on to the fact that a short Irishman was to be seen, year after year, in the winner's enclosure at the Grand National. They discovered who he was and interviewed him. He was open about how he had done it. The trainer would think he was a guest of the owner. The owner would think he was someone to do with the trainer. No one ever asked.

There are many examples of impostors. They can be as innocent as our man in the winner's enclosure or less innocent. They are not all fantasists, as some are put up to it by others, but generally that is exactly what they are - fantasists who have a need to associate themselves with the famous, the powerful or the rich. And Spain has a fantasist impostor who has had a need to associate with all three. His name is Francisco Nicolás Gómez Iglesias, better known to the Spanish media as "el pequeño Nicolás", little Nicholas, whose craving for association has gone further than mere association. His extraordinary story began to unravel in October when he was arrested and charged with fraud, forgery and identity theft.

Little Nicholas is now twenty years old, but the public display of his world of fantasy, and later deception, goes back to 2008 when, just fourteen years old, he made his first public appearance. Mariano Rajoy and the then president of the Community of Madrid, Esperanza Aguirre, attended the celebration for the day of the community. In the video of the report of this celebration you can see Little Nicholas looking over towards the reporter, and so at the camera, and then moving towards her. He tries to obstruct her. She asks him to stop pushing her. She realises that here is a boy who is pretending to be with security.

It was a taster of what was to come because Little Nicholas, among other things, claimed to be involved with the security services, and in particular the National Intelligence Centre (CNI). It was this fantasy which was to lead to his arrest; he allegedly fabricated a document supposedly from the CNI and forged the signature of the government's vice-premier, Soraya Sáenz de Santamaría.

Little Nicholas was well-known in Partido Popular Nuevas Generaciones' circles (the PP youth wing), but somehow he managed to have contacts that went way beyond this political involvement. Yes, there were politicians with whom he supposedly had close links, such as Ana Botella, the mayor of Madrid, and Sáenz de Santamaría, but there were also associations with the royal family. He had met Princess Cristina who apparently believed he could help her with regard to the "caso Noos" affair. This association with the royal household came to an end, he claims, when the CNI started to ask him to do things he didn't like. Little Nicholas had also, though, met King Felipe, and that is beyond doubt. There is a photo of him bowing in front of the new king at his coronation.

The list of contacts and associations Little Nicholas alleges to have had would take far too long to detail. The royal household and others, even including Las Vegas Sands, the promoters of the failed Eurovegas project, all deny these contacts. His claims are utterly extraordinary but there is at the back of them nagging questions, such as how he was able to, for instance, apparently be invited to the king's coronation and how it was that he was always to be seen at various events.

Little Nicholas, who seemingly craved fame, has now found it, but it is fame that has come as a result of his fantasies having got out of hand. His deceptions were used to allegedly extract commissions for "helping out" thanks to his supposed contacts. This was the case with the forged CNI document. He was using influence that he didn't actually have to defraud. Or did he have influence? The revelations are coming thick and fast and the latest involve the secretary of state for trade, Jaime García-Legaz. He admits that he might have been "imprudent". Why? Well, because Little Nicholas, then eighteen, was seemingly involved in meetings between Legaz and senior representatives of Madrid town hall at which licences were discussed. Little Nicholas's alleged frauds stem from seeking kickbacks for licences.

The Little Nicholas case has become ever more bizarre. Is he just a wild fantasist with "megalomaniac delusions", as was noted when he appeared before the judge in October? Or is there more to it? The judge herself found it, for example, hard to understand how he had attended all the various events he had without seemingly not having alerted someone to his behavour. No one ever asked, just like the man in the winner's enclosure. But many others are now wondering. Fantasist, yes, but was someone putting him up to it? 

The Last Hurrah Of Judge Castro

Iñaki Urdangarin has absolved Princess Cristina and the royal household of having had anything to do with the Instituto Nóos, save for the royal household having given him advice to cease his activities with Nóos. It would have been surprising had he suggested otherwise, but regardless of his statements in front of Judge José Castro, the public is inclined to think differently. Opinion polling indicates that an overwhelming majority believe that the princess knew what her husband was allegedly up to with Nóos. Opinion varies, depending on political party sympathies, as to whether the King knew or might even have participated in Urdangarin's alleged activities. 

What the public thinks shouldn't of course matter. Those who do matter are the actors in the Urdangarin drama. While we are now familiar with Urdangarin and his former business partner Diego Torres, there is one actor with whom we are less familiar. The judge.

Not cowed by any fear of appearing disrespectful, Judge Castro has demanded to see the visitors book at the Zarzuela royal palace. He wants to see if the Valencian politicians Francesc Camps and Rita Barberá attended a meeting with Urdangarin at the palace to discuss contracts related to the 2004 Valencia Summit on sport. Urdangarin told the judge on Saturday that no such meeting took place.

Castro has seemingly remained immune to any pressures to back off, and this would be in keeping with his reputation. Often described as being brave, he has also been described as reckless. The two descriptions go hand in hand because they refer to what he has investigated. Urdangarin, and the proximity to the royal family, is the latest in a list that goes back to when he first took up his post in 1991. They have included the "caso Calvià", the investigation into the buying of political advantage by the Partido Popular, and the "caso túnel de Sóller". Though the accused in this latter case were cleared, it was enough to bring about the downfall of one of the accused, the grandfather of Balearics politics, the first president of the islands, the PP's Gabriel Cañellas.

More recently, Castro has been investigating corruption cases involving the Unió Mallorquina party and of course another former PP president, Jaume Matas. There is something of a theme with the various cases over the years, and it is the PP. Matas has been so convinced of some sort of bias that he has said that Castro has a "personal and political phobia" towards him.

Castro can't be accused of bias against one political body. It is more a case that he has locked horns with a Mallorcan establishment, both political and societal. The PP has, since autonomy, been the dominant political presence. Both the PP and the now defunct UM have been synonymous with certain interests in local society, business ones in particular, in ways that other parties haven't been. And for Castro, the confrontation with establishment has moved to a different level, one embodied by Iñaki Urdangarin.

Investigating judges such as José Castro do face accusations of bias. The most famous of Spanish judges, Baltasar Garzón, fell foul of opponents in the PP as well of rivals within the judiciary. His allegiance to PSOE was no secret. Unlike Garzón though, Castro does not court publicity. It is why little is really known about him, other than a reputation for being fearless and for appearing grumpy. He has acquired a further reputation, one among some Mallorcans for having become a hero of the people. Matas and Urdangarin are, for these Mallorcans, joint holders of the status of public enemy number one, and Castro is their pursuer.

Attitudes towards those facing allegations do, however, get influenced by what prosecutors and the judge say and which becomes public knowledge. Castro's statement before Urdangarin's latest court appearance that Nóos was a premeditated act of criminality would only have served to reinforce negative attitudes towards Urdangarin. Such a statement might be perceived as evidence of partiality, but then an investigating judge is not like a judge in an English court.  

It has been suggested that the Urdangarin affair might be spun out so long that Judge Castro retires. He is now 66, but it is understood that he wants to carry on until he is 70. Even by the slow standards of Spanish justice, four years are a long time. Too long for Castro? The "caso Nóos" is one of the last hurrahs for this scourge of the establishment. Will it prove to be the defining investigation by which José Castro will be remembered? Cañellas was let off but he had to resign. Castro's Nóos noose has far bigger game to hunt.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

MALLORCA TODAY - Urdangarin denies royal household influence

Iñaki Urdangarin, the Duke of Palma, spent four hours today making a further declaration in front of Judge José Castro who is investigating charges of diversion of public funds by Urdangarin. The duke denied that the royal household had ever advised him on or endorsed his activities with the Instituto Nóos. He also denied that Princess Cristina had any involvement with Nóos and that she didn't have powers to take any decisions. The judge has requested sight of the visitors' book at the Zarzuela royal palace where, it has been alleged, Urdangarin met with Francesc Camps and Rita Barberá to discuss contracts for the Valencia Summit sporting debate in 2004, for which Nóos was handsomely remunerated. Urdangarin denies that there was such a meeting. The judge also asked about accounts in Switzerland; Urdangarin assured him they were not his.

MALLORCA TODAY - Bauzá rejects cuts to maintenance of royal palace

President Bauzá, declaring himself proud that the Spanish royal family summers in Mallorca at the Marivent palace, has rejected calls that the government should cut the 1.7 million euros that are spent on maintaining the palace.

See more: Diario de Mallorca

On Trial: The Spanish judiciary

Justice, administered and delivered by judges and magistrates in Spain, is administered and delivered in the name of the King. The King, in addressing a legal profession gathering in Barcelona, has reminded judges that it is they alone who impart justice. On Saturday, the King's son-in-law appears in a Palma court. The judge presiding over the "caso Nóos" is consulting with not just the prosecution but also the government and the Partido Popular as to whether they wish the King's daughter, Princess Cristina, to be indicted as part of this case.

Make of this little mix what you will, as there is an awful lot that can be made of it.

Under the Spanish Constitution, the judiciary is independent, and so of course it should be. But the extent to which it truly is independent or neutral is coming under increasing scrutiny. The Garzón affair has raised serious doubts, and the royal family having become embroiled in the wider investigation and trial of the former president of the Balearics, Jaume Matas, raises more doubts.

Let's be clear. If, and one stresses if, there is a case for the King's daughter to answer, then so be it. The royal household, from the outset of the investigation of the Duke of Palma, has made it clear that it respects the actions of the judiciary, but justice being administered and delivered in the name of King when it might involve the King's daughter, as opposed to a commoner (which the Duke is), highlights just how much of a dilemma has been created by the investigation.

For Judge Castro, the dilemma is enormous. By consulting with the government and a political party, he runs the risk of being seen to be subject to political influence. Should it not be his decision and his decision alone? Possibly. But by counselling the wishes of the political class, or a part of it, he is placing the dilemma in the hands of this political class.

In some respects, one could say he is playing a blinder, as he is handing responsibility elsewhere. But however the political class decides to play things, it will be criticised. Firstly, it will be criticised for getting involved at all. Secondly, if it says it does not wish the Princess to be indicted, it risks being accused of applying one rule for one and one rule for another (assuming, that is, there genuinely is a case to answer, and most noises have suggested not, as with the evidence of former Olympic sailing gold medallist, "Pepote" Ballester). Thirdly, if it says it does wish the Princess to be indicted, then it potentially opens up a massive can of worms.

The reason why this can of worms might be opened up is that a trap has been laid by the right-wing union Manos Limpias. In calling for the Princess to be indicted, if the government and the PP were to follow its demand, the union would, in effect, receive official backing. For the government to be perceived as acceding to the wishes of a union with the type of associations it has, i.e. Francoist, could be hugely damaging.

The government will be damned if it does and damned if it doesn't, and a further problem is that the Spanish people, generally speaking, are indifferent to many members of the royal family, with the definite exception of the King, who is held in such enormous regard, and rightly so.

The whole affair surrounding the Duke couldn't have come at a worse time for the Spanish judiciary. The world is having its say about a Spanish system that has tried, convicted and removed from office a leading judge at the behest of right-wing forces. Daniel Kaufmann, senior fellow at The Brookings Institution, has suggested that a travesty has been committed in respect of Judge Garzón, that judicial independence has been compromised, and, moreover, has presented evidence which indicates a decline in Spain's rule of law.

However much the Spanish judiciary is theoretically independent, there is a suspicion of politicisation and partiality. And it is caused not just by politics but also by professional rivalries within the judiciary (the Garzón affair is said to have been influenced by these). Garzón himself is not above charges of politicisation, and it is such charges, for the wider judiciary, which suggests that there needs to be some reform.

At the heart of all this, and a reason why it is all so important, is that the judiciary is a vital instrument of democracy. And in Spain, so is the monarchy. Both institutions, the legal system and the monarchy, are being placed or potentially being placed on trial.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

Two Princes: Felipe and Letizia

A new book about the Spanish royal family by the journalists Carmen Enríquez and Emilio Oliva is due to be published next week. It concentrates on the heir to the throne, Crown-Prince Felipe, and his wife, Princess Letizia. Its central thesis is that the "Princes" are ready to take over the reins of the House of Bourbon from King Juan-Carlos and Queen Sofia. Not that this is likely to happen any time soon. The possibility of an abdication has been raised, but the natural course of events leading to a succession is the one that will be followed.

There are certain similarities between the Spanish and British royal families. The King, while having ruled for 20 odd years fewer than Queen Elizabeth, has, nevertheless, been around for a long time. Felipe, considerably younger than Prince Charles, has had to face a similar challenge to that of Charles, i.e. defining his role. He also has a beautiful, glamorous even, princess. Just like Charles once had.

Like the Queen, Juan-Carlos's stamp is firmly imprinted on the public perception of the monarchy. Both enjoy a personal popularity, which obscures rather less popularity for the total edifices that are the Houses of Windsor and Bourbon. The esteem in which both are held is a further similarity, but the causes of this esteem are quite different.

The King is inextricably linked with the transition to democracy that followed the death of Franco. But even more importantly, it was his vital role in putting down the coup attempt of February 1981 that cemented his popularity. Juan-Carlos is symbolic not only of having guaranteed democracy but also of having presided over the transformation of the country. More than politicians, he is, in the eyes of many, the embodiment of modern-day Spain. Like the Queen, he's a tough act to follow; tougher, if you like, given what he actually represents.

The King is not without his critics, but criticism is generally muted. There is a very good reason for this. It is an offence to defame or slander the royal family, as two cartoonists discovered to their cost when they ridiculed Felipe. The obstacle to freedom of speech is a bone of contention with many, but it has at least spared the Spanish royal family the sort of lampooning that has been the fate of the Windsors.

But the force field that surrounds the royal family has not prevented there being negative attitudes towards Felipe, the consequence, as with Charles, of questions as to what he actually does. However, he deserves sympathy. The apparent uncertainty as to his role would be the burden of any heir, while against the towering figure of Juan-Carlos, it has been hard for him to forge a strong identity.

This, though, is where Letizia has come in. If she has a physical attractiveness like Diana, she has none of the latter's early immaturity or later airhead tendencies. Before marrying Felipe, she was a journalist and presenter on national television. She was blessed with being worldly and intelligent as well as having good looks. Rather than the sham of Charles and Diana, her and Felipe's marriage is genuine, and it is has helped to rid Felipe of a certain stiffness, one he had in common with Charles. The image of Felipe has changed, thanks to the image of Letizia.

However, the regular images of Letizia in the media have led to concerns as to a possible trivialisation of the monarchy. Family shots with her during the summer vacations were all over the press. But rather than trivialising, the effect has been to make the royal family, and especially Felipe, seem to lighten up. In this respect, Letizia does have something in common with Diana in making the royals appear more accessible. Yet here, the similarities with the British monarchy are not directly comparable. For this observer at any rate, Juan-Carlos and Queen Sofia, despite the inevitable formality associated with their positions, come across as far more open than the Queen and Prince Philip. You couldn't imagine either of them, let alone Charles and Camilla, embracing sporting winners in the way that Juan-Carlos and Sofia have done.

Despite the worry that the Spanish monarchy's popularity resides solely with Juan-Carlos, an opposing view, as revealed by annual opinion polls, is that four-fifths of Spaniards believe that the succession will create no problems for the monarchy. And they're probably right. Felipe has come out of his shell and is now, with Letizia, enjoying increased popular support.

How Queen Elizabeth must look at the Spanish royal family and wonder what might have been.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.