Fermín Montes

Fermín Montes is an inspector whose return to duty becomes a test of whether favorable reports can repair a breach of professional trust. A year after being suspended, he is presented as ready to work again; Amaia Salazar, who knows the circumstances behind his suspension, sees no convincing evidence that he has changed. Their conflict is not simply personal: it concerns the risks of allowing a police officer who violated procedure to resume authority over investigations.

Identity and Professional Crisis

Montes is an experienced police inspector, regarded by colleagues as a capable investigator and missed by the team during his suspension. His professional standing is nevertheless compromised by a February incident in the parking area of the Hotel Baztán in Elizondo. The internal-affairs review takes place a year later, with reports recommending his return and the people who were with him during the incident asked to assess whether he is fit to serve.

Inspector Iriarte describes the period after the suspension as outwardly uneventful: Montes had visited the station several times to greet colleagues, and Iriarte considered his conduct appropriate. He tells the review panel that Montes is ready to return. His account is not entirely assured; Amaia notices his hesitation. That pause matters because the official question is about readiness, while the evidence between the two colleagues concerns whether Montes has taken responsibility for what happened.

The Misconduct Behind the Suspension

Amaia's account identifies several distinct failures. Montes left an investigation that was still in progress, disobeyed direct orders, and removed evidence from the station, thereby putting the inquiry at risk. He also pointed his weapon at a civilian and came close to shooting himself. Amaia says that she and Iriarte prevented that final outcome. These are not presented as a single lapse of judgment: they involve the integrity of an investigation, the safety of a civilian, and Montes's own life.

Iriarte explains the incident against the background of a traumatic divorce, heavy drinking, and a failed relationship in which Montes realized he had been used. He describes the convergence of these pressures as overwhelming. A year later, Iriarte says that Montes is more centered, has attended therapy, and no longer drinks; he then qualifies the last claim, saying that Montes drinks less. The distinction between abstinence and reduction leaves the panel with a less settled picture than Iriarte's initial assurance suggests.

Conflict with Amaia Salazar

Montes's relationship with Amaia is shaped by her refusal to treat the suspension as punishment enough. When Inspector Iriarte tells her that his testimony will support Montes's reinstatement, Amaia accepts Iriarte's right to reach his own judgment but insists that the professional boundary Montes crossed cannot be dismissed. His personal difficulties may explain the pressures surrounding the incident, but, in her view, they do not erase its consequences for colleagues, victims, or their families.

Their disagreement spills beyond the station. On one occasion, Montes waits for Amaia outside the home she claims as hers, standing in the shadows and showing clear signs of having been drinking. She instinctively reaches for her weapon before recognizing him, then challenges his right to come there. On another encounter, after she has passed him outside a bar in Txokoto, he throws away his cigarette and follows her, acknowledging that his behavior was wrong and referring again to how difficult his life had been. Amaia cuts off the explanation rather than accept it as an answer.

The sharpest confrontation comes when Montes presses his case for reinstatement. Amaia enumerates the breaches and asks what has actually changed. He points to positive psychiatric reports, but she disputes the idea that reports alone demonstrate recovery: she says he has not gone to therapy, still refuses to recognize her authority, and continues to excuse himself rather than take responsibility. Her anger is sharpened by the fact that she must weigh his future as a police officer while remembering how his conduct endangered an investigation and a civilian.

Review and Return to Duty

At the formal review, Montes appears in a dark blue suit while Amaia and the internal-affairs officers notice a bruise on her face and a split lip on him. The hearing records favorable reports and asks Amaia and Iriarte, as witnesses to the original incident, whether he is ready to return. Iriarte supports reinstatement, drawing on his subsequent visits to the station and what he regards as appropriate behavior. Amaia's earlier objections make clear that she does not regard the same evidence as sufficient proof of change; the hearing exposes the disagreement without making the standard for trust disappear.

Montes does return to police work. At a case briefing, Amaia welcomes him back to the team and recaps the investigations under discussion: the desecrations in Arizkun and the related pattern of partner murders known as the Tarttalo cases. Beñat Zaldúa had identified Antonio Garrido as the adult who encouraged him to act, while the inquiry connected the killings to violent partners close to their victims. Montes is present as the team resumes its work. His return is therefore concrete, but it does not itself settle the earlier dispute over whether he has earned his colleagues' confidence.

Narrative Significance

Montes's reinstatement places institutional judgment beside personal knowledge. The reports and Iriarte's testimony support a return; Amaia's detailed recollection of the misconduct challenges the idea that professional competence or a year of suspension can, by themselves, restore trust. His case also complicates the notion of rehabilitation: improvement is claimed, but its evidence is contested, and even his supporter revises his account of Montes's drinking. The resulting tension follows him back into the team, where the work resumes before the question of accountability has been resolved.