Discover the Mystery: Did Mazón Walk or Use Vilaplana’s Car to Reach Palau During Dana Event
The recent controversy surrounding Valencian President Carlos Mazón has intensified as new details emerge regarding his whereabouts during the grave Dana event on October 29, 2024. For over 13 months, Mazón and journalist Maribel Vilaplana maintained they were together during a lengthy lunch meeting. However, conflicting evidence suggests their timeline may be significantly off.
Timeline of Events
Key new evidence indicates that Mazón and Vilaplana possibly spent more time together than previously acknowledged. Despite their claims of being together until about 6:30 PM, a parking receipt shows Vilaplana left the lot at 7:47 PM. Reports also suggest Vilaplana drove Mazón to the vicinity of the Palau de la Generalitat around 8:00 PM—mere minutes before the alert at 8:11 PM that would ultimately prove too late to save lives.
Consequences of the Dana Event
The Dana event tragically resulted in 229 fatalities. This makes the discrepancies in Mazón’s narrative particularly alarming, as citizens had repeatedly questioned his location during the disaster. He had originally claimed to have walked to the Palau after their meeting, insisting that Vilaplana did not drive him there.
Details of the Lunch Meeting
- Date: October 29, 2024
- Location: Restaurant El Ventorro
- Duration: Initial claims suggested a lunch lasting about five hours
- Parking Departure: Vilaplana’s car receipt notes a 7:47 PM departure
The meal, which was not on Mazón’s official agenda, has come under scrutiny. Witness statements, including Vilaplana’s judicial declarations, have varied over time, casting doubt on their reliability. Initially, she reported leaving the restaurant at approximately 5:45 PM, but her subsequent testimonies implied they remained together longer.
Political Fallout
Following the tragic event, Mazón has faced increasing pressure from both the public and political opposition. His resistance to providing clarity on his actions during the critical hours following their meeting has led to accusations of negligence. His consistent claims of being “unavailable” or “unreachable” during the emergency have been challenged by his critics.
Implications for Governance and Emergency Response
The handling of this incident raises serious questions about governance in emergency situations. With Mazón at the helm of the region’s disaster response, his actions—or inactions—during the Dana event underscore the critical need for accountability and transparency.
The evolving narrative surrounding Mazón and Vilaplana highlights the importance of clear communication in times of crisis. As investigations continue, the citizens of Valencia seek answers to the pressing question: Where was Mazón amid one of the worst tragedies in recent memory?
