Video report
The prosecution maintains the position that the public figure should not be released. The latest statements from the defense do not align with other evidence, including fingerprint analysis conducted by investigators in the bathroom area where the alleged incident occurred. The defense argues that the new version contrasts with the results of a test carried out on footprints found at the scene. In turn, the attorney questions the credibility of surveillance footage from the nightclub cameras, suggesting that parts of that material may be open to interpretation. There is also concern about the defendant’s possible opportunities to evade due to substantial financial resources and the implications of an ongoing divorce with a partner who is no longer bound to him by that relationship. The overall narrative continues to be shaped by competing accounts and ongoing legal proceedings, with the victim’s accusations remaining central to the case.
The special prosecutor’s office has aligned with the prosecution’s view, resisting any attempt to secure release. The latest account presented by the defense is scrutinized for consistency with prior investigative steps and with the physical evidence obtained during the investigation. Investigators note discrepancies between the defendant’s statements and the empirical data collected at the scene, including material gathered from the location of the alleged act and the broader forensic context. The legal teams debate the significance and interpretation of recorded footage from the venue, arguing about what can be conclusively inferred and what remains speculative. The case also touches on broader concerns about risk factors, including the defendant’s financial situation and the personal circumstances surrounding a high-profile split that could influence judicial considerations.