In the latest statements from the former football star Dani Alves, who faced arrest on charges related to an alleged rape of a 23-year-old woman at a club bathroom, the defense has pivoted toward the issue of consent. In the days following his return from Barcelona on December 30, 2022, Alves began presenting a new version of events. He admitted that his previous accounts were inaccurate, acknowledging that he had lied in the past about concealing infidelity from his wife and that the encounter involved penetration. This admission aligns with the DNA findings that later emerged. Yet the accuser’s account remains unaltered in key aspects, including how the knee injury occurred and why footprints appeared on the sink and bathroom cistern, details that have not been publicly clarified by the victim.
Alves first spoke publicly about the sexual assault allegation on television, making his comments on Antena 3 shortly before his arrest. He claimed not to recognize the woman and suggested that the bathroom door had been opened while he was unaware that the room was crowded, implying the accuser had entered first.
Cameras cornered him
Footage from Sutton exposed the gaps in that initial narrative. It shows Alves moving from a VIP table toward a private room with a bathroom, where he spent approximately one quarter of an hour before the alleged incident. Shortly after, the young woman is seen entering the private room. The video contradicted Alves’ earlier statements and contributed to the decision by authorities to arrest him on January 20 and transfer him to the Ciutat de la Justícia.
During his first official statement before the examining magistrate, Alves again altered his account. He claimed that the victim entered the bathroom after him and stayed there for a considerable period, even while allegedly not engaging in any activity. Prosecutors, the defense for the special prosecutor, and the judge noted, among other things, physical evidence collected by the crime scene team, including semen on the floor and traces found on the victim’s clothing. In this version, Alves described a different sequence of events that still carried elements from earlier narratives, including a sexual act described as a hands-on interaction.
DNA results
The continued testimony preceded a crucial forensic development. Semen recovered from the bathroom floor, and samples taken from the victim’s dress and undergarments, were submitted for DNA testing. Alves agreed to provide his DNA for comparison, and hours after deposition and sample collection, the judge ordered preventive detention, citing a high risk of flight given his financial means and the substantial amount of corroborating evidence in the case.
While behind bars, Alves retained private counsel, and DNA analysis subsequently confirmed the presence of his genetic material in the semen recovered from the scene. The defense faced further questions as the investigation progressed, and the attorney began pursuing alternative explanations to reconcile the forensic results with the differing testimonies.
New version
In a new 15-minute statement provided this week, Alves recounted a fourth version crafted with his lawyer’s guidance. He acknowledged that penetration occurred but claimed it was consensual, insisting that mutual attraction had existed moments earlier in Sutton and that the decision to move to a private room was voluntary. Regarding the bathroom events, Alves described the accuser sitting on the toilet, kneeling before him, engaging in oral sex, and then continuing with sexual activity that culminated in intercourse.
The accuser, however, has not altered her account. She testified that she agreed to accompany Alves to the private room after multiple invitations. Once inside, she purportedly entered the bathroom, realized a sink was present, attempted to leave but was blocked by Alves, who then restrained her. She described him sitting on the toilet, forcing her down, slapping her, grabbing her by the neck, and pressing for oral sex that she did not consent to. The sequence then involved a push toward the sink, an act by which she alleges he ultimately ejaculated and asked for a brief pause before leaving.
Independent investigators corroborated several aspects of her account. They noted semen found in the intravaginal area, a knee injury documented in the medical report, and fingerprints in the bathroom, with seven of the accuser’s fingerprints identified and none of Alves’s. Legal sources consulted for context suggest the footprints attributed to the complainant were found on the sink, wall, and toilet, supporting the version that emphasized coercive actions in the bathroom area.
On the other hand, Alves’s latest statements raise questions about the timing and nature of the encounter, including how his account accounts for footprints and other evidence located in the bathroom.
Bathroom interior signs
The accuser continues to assert a version consistent with the physical evidence. She described being led to the private room and, once inside, entering the bathroom and attempting to leave upon realizing the sink was present. She alleges Alves closed the door, sat on the toilet, forced her to sit, and then pushed her to the floor, followed by a series of aggressive physical actions and coercion to perform sexual acts that she did not consent to. The narrative then moves toward the bathroom sink area, culminating in an assertion that he ejaculated and asked her to wait before leaving.
The forensic record aligns with portions of her testimony, including semen recovered in intravaginal samples and the knee injury noted in the medical report, while fingerprints were predominantly associated with the accuser in the bathroom area. Some observers note that the presence of the accuser’s footprints on multiple surfaces in Sutton aligns with her account of following Alves to the restroom after being invited to the private space.
In this latest phase of the case, the public record continues to reflect a clash between the accuser’s account and the evolving statements from Alves and his legal team. The investigation remains active as authorities weigh the competing narratives and the mounting physical and genetic evidence, with further proceedings anticipated to illuminate the sequence of events in the club’s private areas.