A court in Madrid has ordered a €70,000 embargo on María del Valle Robles de Moya, the woman who accused Carlos Hugo Fernández Roca, a former deputy of the Vox party, of sexual abuse.

Fernández Roca was acquitted in two separate trials regarding the allegations made against him.

Following his exoneration, the politician filed a complaint against Robles for alleged false testimony, leading to her investigation and upcoming trial.

Fernández Roca, who resigned from his position in the Congress of Deputies shortly after the allegations were made in 2020, is seeking €337,000 in damages from Robles.

The investigating judge mandated that Robles deposit €75,000 as bond to secure potential compensation for the claimant and cover fines if she is convicted for her alleged false statements.

On February 14, the instruction court granted Robles a one-day deadline to secure this amount, warning her of the consequences of non-compliance, which included the possibility of her assets being seized to fulfill the financial obligation.

Recent documents reveal that the court has approved the embargo on Robles' bank account balances to ensure compliance with the €70,000 requirement set for the judicial fine and potential damages.

During the trial against Fernández Roca in 2022, Robles testified emotionally, claiming that she arrived at his residence in a state of severe intoxication and that he took advantage of her condition to commit abuse.

However, surveillance footage from the entrance of the residence contradicted her account, showing no signs of intoxication or any physical restraint by Fernández Roca.

This evidence ultimately contributed to his acquittal, a decision later upheld by the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid (TSJM).

The public prosecutor had initially sought a five-year prison sentence for Fernández Roca based on Robles' allegations.

In her testimony, Robles contended that she was escorted into the residence by the accused, which became a focal point of the subsequent legal scrutiny.

The judge responsible for investigating Robles noted discrepancies in her account, suggesting that there was no reasonable intoxication observed that would match her claims.

She stated that Robles entered the premises 'normally and freely without any restraint' and exhibited no behaviors associated with significant alcohol consumption, contradicting the narrative presented during the trial against Fernández Roca.

The judge concluded that Robles had reportedly altered details in her testimony with the aim of misleading the court to suggest a higher level of intoxication than was accurate, intending to secure a conviction against the accused.