The trial of the former PSG and Barça player ended on Wednesday. He is accused of sexual assault by a young woman, for acts dating back to December 2022. Nine years in prison have been requested against the Brazilian, incarcerated since January 2023. The date of the verdict is not yet known.
Published
Reading time: 5 min
The trial of Daniel Alves, Brazilian international footballer who played for PSG and FC Barcelona, ended on Wednesday February 7 after three days of hearing in Barcelona. He is accused of sexual assault, a criminal category including rape in Spain, for acts dating back to the night of December 30 to 31, 2022. Placed in pre-trial detention, he faces up to twelve years in prison. While the verdict is expected soon, franceinfo: sport recaps the three days of the trial.
What are the facts ?
On January 2, 2023, a young woman (whose identity is protected) filed a complaint for sexual assault against Daniel Alves, for acts dating back to the night of December 30 and 31, 2022 in a Barcelona nightclub. An investigation was then opened by the Superior Court of Catalonia, leading to the Brazilian being taken into custody. – who denies the facts – on January 20, 2023.
On the magistrate’s orders, he was placed in pre-trial detention for sexual assault. His two requests for appeal having been rejected, he is incarcerated until the opening of his trial on February 5, 2024. In the meantime, the prosecution requested on November 23, 2023 nine years in prison with ten years of supervised release and compensation of 150,000 euros to the victim. His lawyer pleads for release, while that of the opposing party asks for twelve years in prison.
Monday February 5: the victim and her loved ones testify
For the opening of the trial, the complainant was heard for more than an hour by the court, during a closed hearing. His voice was altered and his face pixelated on the recording, to prevent any leaks. According to the prosecution, Alves would have had “a violent attitude” towards the young woman. With his friend Bruno, present on the evening of the events, he allegedly offered champagne to the complainant, her cousin and a friend by behaving “very tactile”.
He then allegedly asked the complainant to accompany him to a room with a toilet (which the complainant did not know). He then allegedly slapped her, tried to perform oral sex on her and penetrated her without contraception.
“The victim asked him several times […] to let her go, saying she wanted to go, but the accused stopped her.”, we read in the indictment. She would have immediately spoken to her loved ones about it. A friend of the complainant, present on the evening of the incident, indicated Monday that Alves had “much trouble” to the victim, who “crying desperately”. “She doesn’t sleep, started taking antidepressants […] barely leaves her house.”confirmed her cousin, in tears, in court.
Tuesday February 6: those close to Alves at the helm
The next day, the Brazilian footballer’s relatives were interviewed, including his friend Bruno. The defense focused its strategy on Alves’ high blood alcohol level. This element, considered an aggravating circumstance in France, constitutes, in the Spanish penal code (article 20), a mitigating circumstance. According to Bruno, Alves started drinking in the afternoon in a restaurant and remained drunk until he returned home at 4 a.m.
“When he entered the room, he bumped into several pieces of furniture and collapsed on the bed.”, testified his wife Joana Sanz. The problem is that this version differs from the one initially presented by Bruno during the investigation: he then assured that Alves had “little drunk”. Also Brazilian, he explained these gropings by “a language problem”.
Concerning the facts, the friend Bruno described the relationship between the accused and the complainant as “a respectful affinity”. Alves allegedly did not inform his friend or, upon returning home, his wife, of the events. His behavior would not have changed. “He came back to dance with us, in the same atmosphere as before”, simply assures Bruno. Present on the stand the same day, the manager of the nightclub and police officers, for their part, discussed the “terror” And “anxiety” of the complainant.
Wednesday February 7: Alves’ hazardous defense
This third and final day was the most anticipated since Dani Alves took the helm. He could have not given details about the events that occurred in the toilets of the nightclub, but he decided to speak, only to answer his lawyer’s questions and not those of the complainant. “I am not a violent man”repeated the Brazilian, who maintained that the sexual relationship was consensual.
He notably gave an account of the day of December 30. “We went out with my friends around 2 p.m., initially just for lunch. We ordered five bottles of wine and Japanese whiskey. I drank more or less two bottles of wine and whiskey, then gin and tonic in a bar”, he presented, emphasizing his inebriation before bursting into tears. Concerning the victim, “we were dancing close and she started to brush against me”he defended himself.
Not enough to polish her image with the prosecutor who, during the conclusions, directly opposed the Brazilian, judging the complainant’s story “absolutely credible” and pointing out that it had not changed since the start of the proceedings, unlike that of the accused. On Wednesday, videos of the nightclub party were shown to the same prosecutor – there was, however, no camera in the toilets – who said she had only seen “a normal young woman dancing”. “It is extremely unfair to blame him for this situation. It is not because a woman agrees to have a drink that she has sexual interest”she added.
The prosecutor recognized the victim’s post-traumatic stress and recalled a doctor’s conclusions regarding her knee injury, requiring “a sufficiently strong impact” to appear. “In the images we can observe normal behavior regarding alcohol [pour quelqu’un qui se dit en état d’ébriété]. He is seen walking normally towards the VIP lounge. He was in complete control of what he was doing.”she concluded, also wondering why Dani Alves did not “say goodbye” to the complainant and why the latter left crying. “This case and these facts do not deserve a minimum sentence,” supported the prosecutor, declining the request for provisional release from the Alves camp because “the risk of flight” to another country is “much more important now that the possible conviction is so close”.