The broker who is said to have established contact between former FPÖ club chairman Johannes Gudenus and the “bait,” a previously unknown woman posing as a Russian oligarch, spoke out on Tuesday.
In an interview with Puls 24, Serbian-born Irena Markovic, who works for Lifestyle Properties, not only spoke about her relationship with Gudenus and his wife, but also described the contact made by M.’s lawyer and her meetings with the alleged Russian oligarch.
“It looked harmless.”
“To me, she actually looked completely unchallenged,” nothing could have struck her, the broker said. The decoy had “perfect looks,” spoke very good English and Russian, and it didn’t even occur to her that it was a trap, she said. With her appearance in public, Markovic wants to refute “numerous rumors, because I have nothing to hide,” she said, according to Pulse 24.
Decoy asked specific questions.
Markovich then went with the alleged oligarch to the timber company she and Johann Goodenus wanted to make as middlemen. Apparently the decoy was well prepared and well versed in forestry. The alleged oligarch asked specific questions. “You only ask questions like that if you know about forestry, about forests, about hunting,” Markowitz said in an interview.
She didn’t learn about the Ibiza video until May 17, when the case gained publicity in Austria. “At that time Mrs. Gudenus called me and told me what had happened,” Markovic says. She was shocked and completely bewildered.”
Irena Markovic is considered a dazzling figure on the Viennese party scene. She has been organizing lavish events for years and now runs a real estate company. For months, there has been speculation in various media outlets that Markovich made contact between Vienna lawyer M., believed to be the alleged organizer of the Ibiza video, and Johann Goodenus, and that she could therefore be considered an accomplice. However, SOKO Ibiza leads her only as a witness, not as a suspect.
Playing figures in the Ibiza scandal.
The Vienna prosecutor’s office has “already made significant progress in the investigation” of the Ibiza video case. Seven suspects are under investigation. According to existing suspicions, at least two people must have been involved in the planning and execution of the recordings – but none of the criminal organizations or foreign intelligence agencies disclosed this in a StA release Tuesday.
Seven people are in the spotlight.
The Vienna prosecutor’s office is very cautious about information in this case – because it is a secret case. The fact that some details have now been made public may be due to the fact that those taken into U-arrest have the right to see the file.
The seven individuals are under investigation for suspicion of improper use of audio recording or listening devices, forgery of highly protected documents, attempted extortion and serious fraud, among others. Since the investigation began in May 2019, which has been conducted in “excellent intensive cooperation” with the COCO, created by the Federal Criminal Police Office, 40 interrogations, 15 house searches and 36 account openings have been conducted. In addition, more than a dozen European investigative assignments were sent to the Netherlands, Spain and Germany, as well as a request for mutual legal assistance to Switzerland.
“To no avail,” several people were offered.
Whether the three arrestees, who are now in pre-trial detention, were involved in making the video is still under investigation, he said. They are now suspected of drug trafficking and serious fraud, “especially since they allegedly sold false information to a homepage operator, among other things.”
The video was quality-enhanced at a recording studio known to StA, prosecutors said. An “introduction” was then attempted: The video was allegedly “unsuccessfully” offered for sale to several individuals, and “millions of dollars were demanded for it.” However, there was no indication that criminal organizations or foreign secret services were involved in the planning or production of the video.
In further proceedings, among other things, numerous seized media items are to be evaluated. The court’s decision on the objection of the lawyer involved in the case to the seizure of documents and media during the search of his office in August has not yet been made.
