In this ongoing case, hospital professionals indicated that a mother faced serious questions after allegedly causing the death of her 6-year-old daughter, Olivia Garcia Martinez. The core figure under scrutiny includes a hospital psychiatrist and the physician who released Olivia’s mother from a Gijón medical facility. Both professionals testified before the judge reviewing the case, stating they were aware of the mother’s actions, believed the act was intentional, and noted a lack of remorse in their assessments. These statements came after two counsel were appointed by the father to pursue the prosecution, Daniel Labrador and Julio Dieguez.
During a joint evaluation, the psychiatrist and the physician described the mother as someone who, upon reflection, recognized the loss of her daughter but showed no regret and appeared emotionally distant from the events. The defendant’s legal representative refrained from offering a comment on this point.
Late on the night of October 31, the mother was transported to Jove hospital at around three in the morning following concerns raised by a relative who alerted authorities. Investigators reported that she administered a lethal dose of medication to the child; the mother herself had also taken some medication, though in smaller amounts. She remained at Jove until about 10:30 a.m., and roughly an hour later she was placed under arrest after spending the night under police custody in the hospital facilities.
Both the evaluating psychiatrist and the attending doctor who discharged Olivia’s mother provided statements that aligned with what they had told the magistrate earlier in the day. The prosecution’s attorneys stressed that the medical opinions carried substantial weight for the investigation, highlighting the stated intent to administer pills to the child with the aim of causing death.
Lawyers noted that the mother did not explicitly utter a certain phrase at the hospital, though later communications – potentially through WhatsApp or email – suggested a similar sentiment. The suspect at the hospital reportedly made remarks indicating she acted because she did not want the child to be with the father.
Prosecution advocate Labrador stressed that the morning statements confirmed the mother’s knowledge of her intent and the existence of this intent, considering those points highly relevant since no direct statements had been made by the mother to date. Third-party comments that reveal intent are seen as critical pieces of the investigation.
The defense attorney added that the physicians indicated the mother was physically well enough to avoid life support and did not show any life-threatening risk, suggesting she did not fear for her life at that moment. The medical team also indicated there was no ongoing risk to her health that would require urgent intervention.
Prosecutors maintain that the doctors’ accounts are credible. They argued that if the mother had been attempting suicide after harming her daughter, she would likely have been admitted to a psychiatric ward under the standard protocol. The doctor who treated her observed that no indication existed to trigger a different safety measure or protocol, and there was no evidence of an immediate threat to her life, according to Julio Diéguez.
The medical notes describing the mother’s behavior around the time of the incident described typical daily dosing patterns for the medications she had access to. The prosecution noted that there were no signs during hospitalization of a risk to the mother’s life and that there had been no need for critical life-sustaining support.