Football star Dani Alves faces trial over allegations that he assaulted a 23-year-old woman in a nightclub bathroom at dawn on the final night of 2022. The case has evolved through several versions as Alves and his defense team respond to the accusations. Investigators have examined the physical evidence, including fingerprints and intravaginal samples, and forensic results reportedly show semen traces. According to sources cited by EL PERIÓDICO, a DNA analysis conducted by authorities supports claims that Alves gave inconsistent accounts in his statements to the court and that some elements of his third account did not align with the forensic findings.
The alleged incident led to the victim being taken to a hospital the same morning for a sexual assault examination. The hospital, identified in the reports as the primary center for such assessments, conducted the forensic medical evaluation, which identified intravaginal samples containing semen and other related findings.
Law enforcement later conducted a detailed on-site examination of the Sutton club bathroom, where the incident is said to have occurred around four in the morning. Investigators observed semen traces on the floor and later collected semen samples from multiple areas of personal clothing as part of their efforts to reconstruct events. Two days after the incident, the complainant formally filed the report, and later investigations yielded additional material connected to the case.
On January 20, Alves submitted a DNA sample, possibly a saliva specimen, in a forensic procedure that prompted the Barcelona court to review the case. The defense, represented by Cristóbal Martell, argues that the evidence should be reconsidered. The genetic profile was compared against several collected samples, and according to the cited sources, the results did not conclusively exclude Alves as the contributor to the material at issue.
Three versions of Alves
Shortly after the alleged events, Alves published a video in which he claimed not to know the complainant, insinuating that she was attempting to leverage his fame. He suggested the two had met unintentionally and that the encounter in the bathroom was unplanned. This initial account was the first version presented publicly.
During the subsequent court appearance, where investigators from the Mossos Sexual Assault Center had gathered evidence, Alves indicated a shift in narrative. He described entering the bathroom first, with the implication that the other party entered afterward while he was momentarily away. When asked to recount what transpired, he suggested that nothing occurred beyond the presence of the woman in the bathroom.
The second version, considered less credible by many observers, proposed a longer period of interaction, during which no clear events occurred despite the small size of the bathroom. If that account were true, investigators queried how semen could be found on the bathroom floor. In this phase, Alves acknowledged that his earlier statements were not accurate and offered a third version, claiming that the victim engaged in oral activity while seated on the toilet.
Injuries and evidence
The complainant maintained her description of the events in subsequent police interviews and in a formal statement at the courthouse two days later. Alves described a scenario in which the door to an unrecognized room was entered, the woman became aware of the bathroom setting, and a struggle ensued. He described attempts to restrain her and references to forceful actions that led to the alleged sexual act. She reported distress and resistance, including pleas for release, which align with the broader accounts under review.
There were no video recordings of what happened inside the bathroom. However, the hospital report notes injuries that align with the statements given by the victim. Investigators identified seven fingerprints on surfaces described by the victim, and the sequence of movements she outlined was found to be consistent with the physical findings. The complainant had described symptoms consistent with the later forensic observations.
Source review
Alves’ defense, led by Martell, filed an appeal that challenged certain evidence and questioned the conduct of the investigation. The Barcelona courtroom weighed the available materials, with prosecutors and the special attorney defending the victim arguing against release from custody due to the seriousness of the charges and the risk of flight. Alves, a Brazilian national with numerous business interests, could face extradition considerations if convicted, depending on the applicable treaties and the status of any pending actions in Spain.