The tenant knocked on the door of an owner occupied apartment and delivered threats in person: “You and your wife are going to have problems with me, I'm going to slap you now, I'm going to hit you, I'm going to finish both of you, you're going to the hospital. . .”.
His defence in court was based on a false story that his daughter had been hit. Despite the fact that the tenant was found guilty he continued to insult the property owner and he also seems to have continue to distribute his fabricated story among people within the community.
It is the person with the rare illness of being intermittent blind, who is renting a flat in Bloque 6, that has been found guilty. Soon after he moved into the community, he was frequently seen for years by the entrance of Bloque 6 talking and smoking dope with youngsters that manly did not live within the community. This man is called “Jefe” among the youngsters that are associated with him.
Threats delivered on the doorstep
It was at lunch time on 18 March 2018 when "Jefe" knocked on the entrance door on the apartment next to the squatters and threatened the two people in their own apartment. The man in the apartment went out, just standing in the door frame outside the entrance door, to find out what “Jefe” wanted. This time “Jefe” was wearing clear protective glasses, instead of the dark sunglasses he usually has been seen wearing when walking with a white cane appearing to be blind.
On this occasion “Jefe” was also accompanied with his second youngest daughter and the brown dog “Jefe” had for a shorter time before and after he got his white puppy of the potential dangerous breed, Dogo Argentino, which he apparently has been telling people is a guide dog. Anyone that has seen a Guide Dog can understand that “Jefe's” white dog is not a Guide Dog.
“Jefe” did not show a friendly behaviour when he delivered the threats on the doorstep and he got more and more angry and put a finger in the face in an unfriendly way on the man standing just outside the entrance door to listen to what “Jefe” had to say.
“Jefe” had difficulties to express what he wanted, but it could not be mistaken that he was there to threaten them to stop interfering in his “business” and he was talking about a “war” had been created.
It is was obvious that “Jefe” was searching for a heated conversation where he could show what he is capable to do. “Jefe” did not achieve what he wanted and got more and more angry.
The daughter of “Jefe” told the father in French: “Elle a une belle voiture là-bas” (She has a beautiful car down there).
The reasons for delivering the threats seem to be related to the huge interest “Jefe” has shown in the next door apartment that became occupied by squatters in January 2018.
The young man with the Pitbull from the squatter apartment was moving around in the background and had “Jefe” to go back to his apartment when the threats did not deliver the expected result and he lost it more and more.
The squatter apartment
It was in January 2018 some youngsters went into the next door apartment (1-D), which was owned by a bank after being repossessed, and turned it into a “piso de narcos”. The one who had the key to the squatter apartment was the other young man with a Pitbull who had grown up within the community and have been seen around the entrance of Bloque 6 smoking dope with “Jefe” on many occasions.
“Jefe” showed big involvement in the squatter-flat from start. Lots of dope was smoked constantly in “piso de okupas / narcos” and lots of younger people that did not belong to the community were trafficking in the flat. It was difficult to keep the windows open in the next door apartment and not getting in smoke of the dope. At the worst times, then the smell of dope came though the wall between the two flats even when the windows were closed.
The crime was reported to the Police (“Denuncia”). Due to difficulties for Policia National to locate and identify “Jefe” in his home in Bloque 6 , it prolonged the case to come up in court.
Request of closing “Puerta Sur”
The affected property owner requested that the south gate by the paddle courts (“Puerta Sur”) should have been closed permanently for awhile since lots of youngsters that did not belong to the community used it to get access to “piso de narcos” (1-D). The President was unwilling to do so and replied that it was illegal. For something to be illegal it has to violate a law. There is noting illegal for the community decide to close a gate. People just have to use another gate.
At the annual community meeting on 24 March 2018, the affected property owner inform about being threatened by a tenant and that a police report was filed (“Denuncia”).
The affected property owner requested that “Puerta Sur” should be closed permanently for some time since it was used for trafficking people that did not belong to the community. The “Vocal in Bloque 6” was not happy to have “Purta Sur” closed, since he then had to go through the main entrance. He was also of the opinion that people will just jump over if they wish to get in. The assistant of the administrator filled in with saying that “Puerta Sur” could not be closed of security reasons.
At this point one needed a key for both getting in and getting out of “Puerta Sur” and not all property owners had a key to “Puerta Sur”! One could have expected that the Administrator should have clarified the legal possibilities, but he seemed to be in the hands of his assistant and the President of the community.
The property owner that had been threatened and was the one most badly affected by the “piso de narcos” found it irritating that neither the “Vocal” or the President, that both live in Bloque 6, had not bother to talk to her about all the problems she had to face. They could hardly have been unaware of all the trouble created by “Jefe” the squatters in “piso de narcos”.
Besides the President it was mainly the “members of “Junta Directiva” that attended the meeting and they did not seem to want to know about the problems either.
It was asked: If it was too much to ask for the president or the Vocal to talk to the property owner facing lots of trouble within Bloque 6. No answer was given and when it was pointed out that the question could be answered with Yes or No, still no answer was given. It was obviously too much to ask since neither the President, the Vice-president, or the “Vocal of Bloque 6” never ever have bothered to talk to the property owner about the huge amount of trouble with the squatters.
The affected property owner wanted to become a “Vocal of Bloque 6", but those property owners attending the meeting decided to continue with the same “Vocal of Bloque 6” .
The Assistant of the Administrator was saying that the affected property owner would be invited to the meetings of “Junta Directiva”. Despite the fact that more then two years has passed, the property owner has never been invited to any of their meetings.
First session in court
When “Jefe” came to court on May 2018 he appeared very blind. He came to the court with his own lawyer that he had to pay out of his own pocket. The lawyer instructed the daughter of “Jefe” before the court case started.
The court case had to be postponed because “Jefe” said in court that he was in a lot of pain from an accident and had an eye operation the previous day. The court case was postponed to the 7 June 2018. “Jefe” seems to have recovered quickly, because a few hours later he could be seen walking without his white cane on the path in the community garden. The following day he could be seen walking with ease without any cane at all.
Massive disturbances from “piso de narcos”
“Jefe” seems to have spent lots of time in the squatter apartment and tried to disturb the sleep of those people he had threatened next door, especially before the session in court. The other young man with a Pitbull seems to have help “Jefe” with the disturbance. This young man, who refers to himself as “Bambino”, has later also been found guilty of threatened the same people, but the sentence is not yet legally valid since “Bambino” has appealed against it.
These two young man with one Pitbull each are friends and have both grown up within the community. These two Pitbulls are almost identical. The Pitbull of the young man in the squatter apartment is called “Thyson”. “Bambino” who is the other young man with a Pitbull, who constantly has being seen with “Jefe”, and lives with his parents in Bloque 8. His Pitbull is called “Duque”.
A few days before the first session in court on May 17, 2018: a new group of young Moroccans arrived at the squatter / narcos apartment (1D). They spoke Arabic to each other. [“Jefe”] spent a lot of time with them in 1D and one could hear him speaking very loud in English. [“Jefe”] spended every night in the squatter / narcos apartment (1D) two weeks before the trial and seems to have been trying to be as loud as possible to disturb the sleep of [those] in the next door apartment. Early in the morning of the day before the trial (04.20 on June 6, 2018) [those in the apartment next door] were awakened by the loud noise in the squatters / narcos apartment (1D ) and one could hear [“Jefe”] laughing and talking loud. Ten minutes later, someone rung the doorbell on the [next door apartment. A few minutes later, [“Bambino”] could be seen jogging back to the squatter / narcos apartment. An hour later (05.35) [“Jefe”] returned to his apartment escorted by [“Bambino”]. During the afternoon and the night before the trial, [“Jefe”] He was laughing out loud on the squatter / narcos apartment and one could smell a strong drug smell. The trial was scheduled for 11:15 the next day.
(Translation of “Responder al Recurso de apelación interpuesto por “Bambino” contra la Sentencia de fecha 18 noviembre de 2019”, (53-2019) Juzgado No 4 de Marbella)
Second session in court
The postponed session in court came finally up on 7 junio 2018. “Jefe” came to court with the same lawyer, from MLI, Lawyers & Investment as during the first session in court. This time the daughter of “Jefe” did not come to court. “Jefe” appeared so blind in court that he could not even stand up on his own. His wife misbehaved and was thrown out of the courtroom by the Judge at the very beginning, just when the property owner that had been threatened by “Jefe” had started to give her declaration.
“Jefe's” defence was a fabricated story where he was saying that the man, whom “Jefe” had threatened in person, had hit the daughter of “Jefe”. It stand out as strange that the daughter of “Jefe” did not turn up in court this time.
During “Jefe's” declaration in court he did not say anything about his own profession. Instead he started to talk about the professions of his parents, which is odd for a middle aged man with four children. The judge shut him up when he was saying that his father is a Judge (“Juez”).
“Jefe” has been saying to people that he has worked as a security man for a prince from Syria. It is believed that he might have worked for Monzer al-Kassar from Syria, who was called the “Prince of Marbella”, due to his extravagant lifestyle in Marbella.
In February 2009 Monzer al-Kassar was sentence to 30 years in prison in the US after being found guilty of for conspiring to sell weapons to the Colombian rebels. He is due for release in 2033.
“Jefe's” lawyer was taken by surprise when the recording was presented in front of the judge. The recording clearly showed the truth.
One can read in the sentence that “Jefe” was saying: “Tú y tu mujer vais a tener problemas con migo, te voy a dar una bofetada ahora, te voy a dar, voy a terminar con las dos, vais a ir al hospital. . . ” (“You and your wife are going to have problems with me, I'm going to slap you now, I'm going to hit you, I'm going to finish both of you, you're going to the hospital. . .”).
The judge asked “Jefe” what he meant. He was then saying that they should both be in hospital for not being mentally well. Earlier during his declaration he had been saying that the president of the community had told him that these two people were not mentally well.
“Jefe” was found guilty, but only had to pay 300 EUR in fine. The modest fine is possibly due to a small declared income. It is believed that he receives disability benefit for being "blind".
Unpleasant behaviour continues
“Jefe's” blindness seemed to have disappeared quickly. In the afternoon, after the court case, “Jefe” and “Bambino” came walking together on the path between the swimming pool areas.
All of a sudden, “Jefe” could see the two people he had been up in court against inside the near swimming pool area and insulted verbally by saying “Locos” to them in an unfriendly way.
Despite the fact that “Jefe” never appealed against the sentence, he continued to insulting these two people and even accused them for have “stolen” 300 EUR from him and beaten up his daughter.
If “Jefe's” story would have been true, then they would have made a “Denucia” themselves, instead of just using the story as a defence when he was accused for committing a crime.
“Jefe” seems to have continuing to distribute his false story among people within the community. Another property owner that he had heard this story of “Jefe” from his tenant. Unfortunately, if people are just gossiping around without having the courtesy to tell what they been told to the one's affected and stand up for as witness in court, then one cannot clear this out by pressing charges against “Jefe” for defamation.
The sentence was communicated to the Administration, JOSÉ URBANO CONSULTORES, and the property owner that had been threatened expressed in writing that the behaviour of the tenant was unacceptable. It was expected that the administrator should have assisted the president to fulfil her duties of dealing with unacceptable behaviour within the community (Articulo 7, Ley 49/1960).
The Administration only asked if they could forward the sentence, which they could do. Thereafter, the administration never communicated what action they have taken and its outcome. Neither was the property owner never invited to “Junta Directiva” to talk about the problem. The sentence gave an excellent opportunity to deal with the unpleasant situations “Jefe” causes within the community.
Do the Presidents (President and Vice-President) and Administrator have some personal gain from not taking any actions?
Later on it was found out that the property owner of the apartment “Jefe” is renting in Bloque 6 is a man running ASESORIA MEDINA MARIN S.L. He was later contacted and asked if he was aware of the fact that his tenant had been found guilty of threatening another property owner.
First the owner of the apartment of “Jefe” was saying that he needed to speak to his brothers since they own the apartment in between. Next time he was saying that he owned the apartment with his sister. The third time he was saying that they had received the sentence from the Administration, but he is not willing to take any actions and just regarded it as a disagreement.
Anyone else that can read: “Tú y tu mujer vais a tener problemas con migo, te voy a dar una bofetada ahora, te voy a dar, voy a terminar con las dos, vais a ir al hospital. . . ” (“You and your wife are going to have problems with me, I'm going to slap you now, I'm going to hit you, I'm going to finish both of you, you're going to the hospital. . .”) in the sentence, would probably come to a different conclusion.
"Jefe" continues to threaten and insult people within the community. When he was accompanied by "Bambino", on 18 August 2021, then he expressed to people by the swimming pool if a person wanted to get the face broken or not (“te parto la cara o no”). He talked about his 8 years old daughter being hit, possibly referring to the same fabricated story that he came up with as his defence in court when he was found guilty.
Then “Jefe” continued talking about someone by the swimming pool with psychiatric issues and referred himself and “Bambino” are normal (“somos gente normal”).
It becomes strange when these two are talking about other peoples mental health and accusing others for not being normal. "Bambino" has in fact written that he suffers from a psychiatric illness in a law-suite (“Denuncia”), which he has signed and got registered at the court.
Further information to be obtained by registered users. Please, login and try again or register if you don't have a user account.
- Sentencia (Núm 110/18) Juzgado de Instrucción No 4 de Marbella
- Sentencia (Núm 53/19) Juzgado de Instrucción No 4 de Marbella
- Monzer al-Kassar (in Arabic منذر قصار)
- www.newyorker.com - The Trafficker
- La conexión Siria-Marbella: Hablamos con el traficante de armas que rechazó vender a Bashar al-Ásad
- Ley 49/1960, de 21 de julio, sobre propiedad horizontal
- Art. 172, Ley Orgánica 10/1995, de 23 de noviembre (BOE-A-1995-25444) del Código Penal
- How Administrators should act to deal with squatters
- Sentence against the young man with a Pitbull
- Squatter filing a false Police Report against a property owner
- A dangerous dog has attacked another dog and a worker
- Legal actions against potential dangerous dogs
- False accusation of Pedophilia
- Is the Administrator fit for his duties?
Boletín Oficial del Estado (BOE)
Ley 49/1960, 21 July, sobre propiedad horizontal.
The Administrator has to:
- To watch over the good keeping of the community, its facilities and services, and to make relevant warnings to the property owners.
- Prepare in due time and submit to the Board of property owners the plan of foreseeable expenses, proposing the necessary means to meet them.
- Attend to the maintenance of the community, arranging the repairs and measures that are urgent, immediately reporting them to the President or, where appropriate, to the property owners.
- To execute the agreements adopted in the matter of works and to make the payments and to carry out the collection of community fees.
- Act, as the case may be, as secretary of the Board of property owners and keep the documentation of the community to be available for the property owners.
- All other assigned powers by the Board of property owners.
(Artículo 20, Ley 49/1960)
The owner and the occupant of the apartment or premises are not allowed to develop in it or in the rest of the property activities prohibited in the statutes, that are harmful to the property or that contravene the general provisions on annoying, unhealthy, harmful, dangerous or illicit. (Artículo 7.2, apartado 2, Ley 49/1960)
The president of the community, on his own initiative or that of any of the owners or occupants, will require those who carry out the activities prohibited by this section to immediately cease them, under warning of initiating the appropriate legal actions. (Artículo 7.2, apartado 2, Ley 49/1960)