The case involving the Atrium Vault has moved into the prison phase. This development was first reported by the provincial court in Cáceres. Two days later, a hearing was held to determine the appeal filed by the defendants’ legal representatives seeking their release.
In its decision, the Chamber notes the existence of flight risk and signs pointing to guilt, including a pattern of prior offenses and potential cooperation with a partner in related crimes. The ruling signals that the investigation will continue at its current pace, since deliberations occurred just 48 hours after three magistrates met with the parties — Sylvia Córdoba, the defense attorney for the accused, and a representative from the insurance side, which has become the principal private prosecution because wine owners sought compensation.
During the session last Wednesday, the defense attorney argued that the judge Aida de la Cruz de la Torre from court no. 4 had issued a judgment that appeared disproportionate to the charges, which allege forced robbery carrying a possible prison sentence of up to six years under the Criminal Code. Conversely, the insurer urged that the judge’s decision be sustained and that the offenders be remanded in Cáceres prison a month prior to the hearing.
Eleven criminal convictions
In his detailed ruling, Oda lays out the grounds for his decision point by point. First, he addresses escape risk, noting that the public prosecutor’s office has already shown that the defendants lack credible roots to avoid custody. The Madrid residence claimed by Córdoba is examined, and the report highlights substantial activity in recent months, including travel to six different countries before they were apprehended in Croatia.
Regarding involvement in the alleged events, the judge asserts that no definitive conclusions can yet be drawn about responsibility, but emphasizes that the ongoing proceedings reveal numerous persistent indicators of connection and intent. He also mentions one defendant, Constantin Dumitru, in the context of prior offenses, including property crimes, domestic violence, other criminal violations, assaults, and theft, highlighting a pattern of behavior across multiple jurisdictions.
Finally, the decision touches on a key point raised by the defense about Priscila Lara Guevara, who requested release on grounds of deteriorating health and prison conditions. The chamber notes that prison health services report no major illnesses, that she is not on any medications, and that any discomfort is mild and being treated appropriately.
The question remains: what punishment do the defendants face? The two individuals charged in connection with the Atrio robbery are accused of forced theft under Article 241 of the Penal Code. The case falls under subsection 4 of this article, which stipulates that when acts are especially serious or the method or damage inflicted is significant, penalties range from two to six years of imprisonment, provided certain conditions described in Article 235 apply. The final determination will also consider the potential compensation sought by the insurer for the value of the wines involved.
As for the parties involved, the public ministry is pressing for conviction. At this stage, it is unclear how much the insurer will claim, since their private charge has been questioned and debated during the latest proceedings. The defendants maintain their innocence and rely on their defense team to challenge the case against them, asserting that accusations do not reflect the facts or the context of the incident. The court will continue to weigh the evidence and the evolving legal arguments as the case proceeds.
In addition to the legal questions, observers are watching how the interplay between flight risk, prior conduct, and possible cross-border activity will shape the final outcome. The incident has drawn attention to cross-national investigations and the way private prosecutions can influence the pace and scope of courtroom proceedings. The ongoing case exemplifies how authorities balance public safety concerns with due process guarantees while navigating the complexities of multi-jurisdictional cases.