This Mossos d’Esquadra they kept bath from the disco sutton where was it supposed to be the violation allegedly committed by the player daniel alves same night of events. They did so on January 2, two days before the 23-year-old actor revealed the truth. place it police seal – a simple sticker affixed to the door slot that would break if someone opened the door – reassured the inspectors that: no one can pollute that area. Thus, the science police found biological evidence – semen residue and fingerprints – that would allow the judge and the prosecution to know that Alves was in court on January 20, and would likely be decisive in proving whether or not Alves was Alves. sexual assault – as the victim always condemned – or was a consensual sexual encounter by the player – now pointed out by the player’s defense.
A briefing from the Barcelona Court of Appeals, which confirmed the footballer’s precautionary detention this week, described the police investigation responsible for Unitat Central d’Agressions Sexuals (UCAS) as “rigorous” – defensive. In this capacity, the investigators carrying out the investigation (70% of the agents in that unit are women) have a duty. Christopher MartellAlves’ lawyer called it “biased” and stressed that this police investigation has begun before the young woman reported what had happened.
counted hours
“Between rape and denunciation it can take months“Because women have a lot of police resources to think about. That time frame is against the victim, in favor of the aggressor. miss the tests The police sources in question state that this will be very helpful in showing the facts. That’s why UCAS, a unit created three years ago, starts investigating ex officio as soon as it learns about sexual assaults, without waiting for the victim to file a complaint, which will be necessary for the prosecution of the crime.
On the morning of December 30, the first agents of Mossos went to the young woman at around four in the morning and saw her condition, they mobilized the inspectors and they gave the order to keep the bathroom. And before the victim filed a complaint and therefore acted under judicial protection, UCAS acted ex officio and sent scientific police agents to inspect the area looking for biological evidence. Agents found as many as seven fingerprints in that slot that matched the victim’s complaint, reflecting a series of positions her body occupied. They also found traces of semen on the floor. The victim reported on January 2.
If the bathroom had not been sealed, these biological remains would have been lost.: other people would come in to use it, and best of all, the maintenance guys would clean it after hours.
burden of proof
That same night, long before the decision to report Alves, the young woman was taken to the Hospital Clinic, a reference center in Barcelona where sexually assaulted women must go without delay. they performed a forensic examination, collecting semen samples from her underwear and also from inside her vagina, according to current protocol. results National Institute of Toxicology and Forensic Sciences Weeks later – with a saliva sample taken from Alves in his statement in court on January 20 – he confirmed that the semen belonged to the player. In the medical report, it was reported that the young woman also injured her knee.
All these signs obtained from the visual inspection of the bathroom and the forensic examination of the complainant, Alves lied. The last of the three versions he gave after he was cornered and charged by the judge consisted of reassuring him that Sutton was in the bathroom when the young woman walked in and gave him a blowjob. However, this latest version did not match up with the victim’s knee injury, the fingerprints identified by the scientific police, or the presence of semen marks in the victim’s vagina.
The victim, according to his complaint at the police station and his statement at the court, explained that this is what happened in that bathroom. Alves sat on the toilet and he forced himself to sit on it.. She told him to stop and begged her to let him go. He said no. He threw her to the ground, grabbed her by the neck, slapped her and tried to force her to give him blowjobs – she refused. Then he picked it up, put it across the sink, and finally put it across the toilet and raped it until it emptied. This version of the victim coincides in part with the indications obtained through the decision to initiate an investigation before the complaint was made and to guard the bathroom immediately after the events.