Alves’ defense argues that the videos “deny” the victim’s version.

Alves’ defense argues that the videos “deny” the victim’s version.

The defense of ex-Barcelona-Brazilian footballer Dani Alves argues in Barcelona court that the nightclub’s videos “radically deny” the victim’s version because they do not show her in a climate of “terror, fear or domination” , claiming that his account may be a “narrative distortion.”

In the appeal filed with the Court to request his provisional release, to which EFE has had access, Alves offers to hand over his passport, wear a telematics bracelet to keep away from the victim, bail that is required and appear, even daily, in court.

The appeal, written by attorney Cristóbal Martell, argues that there is no risk of flight that the judge relied on to send him to prison without bail on January 20, taking into account that Alves went voluntarily to testify for the Mossos and that doesn’t it already have the “economic power of periodic income” that the instructor attributed to it.

In this sense, he recalls that he was fired from the Mexican Pumas in which he played and that several sponsorship, advertising and image contracts that he had signed with various brands were terminated following his rape allegation.


In his appeal, Martell discusses the clues that led the judge to send Alves to prison, primarily using the video footage prior to the young woman and Alves entering the private bathroom of a private room at the Sutton nightclub , where allegedly raped her, on the night of last December 30.

According to the letter, the videos show that Alves and the victim, who went to the nightclub with a cousin and a friend, were talking to each other in a “playful and festive way, surrounded by many people in an open space” before that moment. . that “is far” from the “environmental harassment” scenario.

Then, the lawyer adds, denies the recording that the footballer closed the bathroom door in which the alleged rape took place: first he is the one who enters the premises and two minutes later the young woman does, “without Dani Alves letting him take the clear the way.”

In defense of Alves, this is the moment “before the sexual encounter in the tiny cubicle or bathroom” that the complainant expresses “as if lived in a climate of terror, fear or microcosm of domination, a scenario that the images in most deny cases. radical way ”.

Martell believes that the victim’s version should be questioned when looking at the footage as a whole, which shows “a VIP area that is far from a closed and watertight space, but is open and visible to the broad public.” and overcrowded room by a very large group of people roaming around and interacting closely.”

Consequently, the defense argues, the images “come into conflict and contradiction” with the complainant’s version and suggest that her account “of what happened in the loneliness of the couple in the bathroom room could also be adorned with identical elements of narrative distortion”.


On appeal, Alves’ defense asserts that the former Brazil international voluntarily appeared to testify before the Mossos d’Esquadra while he already knew that a sexual offense complaint was pending against him and it had been published that he would be arrested: “It is clear to answering the call is the opposite of walking away”.

In addition, he claims that after attending his mother-in-law’s funeral in Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Alves was able to go to Mexico – where he had to return because he was a member of Pumas – although he chose to fly to Mexico. Barcelona “voluntarily” attends the appointment on January 20 with the Mossos d’Esquadra in the office of his then lawyer on January 17, after which he was arrested.

The defense also argues that Alves lives in Esplugues de Llobregat (Barcelona) with his wife and that he has personal, family, social and business roots in the Catalan capital, which he argues interferes with his flight risk.

Unlike the instructor, the appeal indicates that the fact that Alves has dual Spanish and Brazilian citizenship cannot be an element that stands in the way of his parole.

He also replies to the instructor that he saw, among other things, a flight risk due to the footballer’s economic standing -he explained that he received between 30,000 and 50,000 euros a month-, and states that Alves has been fired from Puma’s and has lost several times . advertises contracts after serving time in prison, though acknowledging that he has amassed savings and wealth over his long career.

Likewise, the appeal ugly the judge, who also justified preventive detention to prevent Alves from reacting violently against the victim, since “this prognosis cannot be confirmed without any element suggesting his agreement, however small.”

Source: El heraldo