“You forgot about the newspaper archives”

Dressed in fuchsia with a clear nod to Rocío Carrasco’s look in her documentary, Maria Patino announced this Friday that he has won the legal battle Antonio David Flores.

“María Patiño Castro has been acquitted of the crime of slander and libel filed by Antonio David Flores“, the presenter announced this Friday in As if we were Shhh. Immediately after, her colleagues received the news with a great applause for the journalist.

After revealing that he had won the battle in court, Patiño dedicated a few words to the former Civil Guard. “During this time I have had the ability to remain silent, waiting for someone to go to the newspaper archives to look at something. That has been to my advantage. What they forgot is that I rectified it in the same program where I gave the information. The fact that I rectified that he put up those posters does not imply that I committed any insult or slander, because I was giving an opinion. which had been discussed prior to the programme I was presenting,” he explained.

The host of the Fabricantes Studio show stated that the responsibility is not of “Socialité” or of her, but of the previous documented facts. “The judge says that If this man is socially considered an abuser, neither ‘Socialité’ nor María Patiño are responsible, but rather previous events recounted“You have the right to appeal. Do it,” he said.

Finally, after learning the resolution of the case, María Patiño confessed to the viewers that she was satisfied with the resolution of the sentence.You forgot about the newspaper archives. They focused on what I said, but not on what I didn’t say. That was my salvation.. Because when you speak with hate, you forget to find the whole truth“, he said.

It should be remembered that Antonio David Flores denounced María Patiño in 2022 after information that the communicator revealed in Socialite. On the Telecinco programme, Patiño stated that Olga Moreno’s ex had been responsible for putting up posters in Malaga that labelled him as an “abuser”. However, the journalist rectified the information on the aforementioned programme, which turned out to be a key factor in the ruling being in her favour.