Rewritten Narrative of the Case Involving Jesús Pradales

No time to read?
Get a summary

Jesús Pradales, a man with four children, three of them minors, has faced a life shadowed by imprisonment and precarious living conditions. The central argument centers on the notion that his family has endured a fragile situation since his arrest. Pradales is awaiting trial on accusations tied to the death of his partner, Juana Canal. The case includes chilling details: prosecutors claim he dismembered Juana’s body and kept remains for nineteen years, a fact presented as part of the broader narrative surrounding the disappearance and alleged murder.

In documents submitted to the Madrid 21st Investigating Court and accepted for review, Pradales states that he will not flee and that he cooperates with the justice system. Notably, he provided two statements at the police station and another earlier statement asserting that Juana’s death was accidental. A judge has been guided by this thread of testimony, with Pradales insisting, “I loved Juani. I extended my arm, she was motionless, her eyes open, pupils dilated.” He describes an initial act of violence in their shared Ciudad Lineal home and a subsequent attempt to salvage a deteriorating situation, including transporting a body to Ávila by taxi and returning home to cover up the crime for nearly two decades. The case notes he did not deliver the truth immediately.

Footage and testimony show Pradales discussing the moment he harmed Juana, the fear that overwhelmed him, and the sequence that followed. He recalls a violent act in a bathtub, attempting to conceal what happened and then starting a long period of silence. The confession became a turning point and led to his arrest. The narrative continues with a broader sequence of events that includes a complex web of bills, living arrangements, and responsibilities that weighed on the family as the years passed without resolution.

Jesús Pradales during a search of the nearby farm where Juana’s remains were found. Ephesus

Following confession, Pradales was transferred to Torredondo Prison Center in Segovia. His detention began in October of the previous year. In recent proceedings, his defense argued for release, emphasizing a precarious home situation, outlining a family income chart that includes a pension allocated to his wife and three underage children, totaling 1,114 euros, which they claim is insufficient for subsistence. The defense also notes the strain of maintaining two small businesses, including a hamburger venture and a traveling fair, in addition to fairground equipment. They argue that continued imprisonment harms the family’s economic stability, with income struggling to meet needs.

Another thread in the filing concerns insurance obligations for the couple’s attractions and their expiration date. The defense indicates that payments were made during imprisonment but produced no tangible benefit, highlighting a broader history of financial challenges tied to the case and the family’s attempt to sustain themselves under difficult circumstances.

Two businesses, a hamburger trailer and a fairground, are cited as part of the financial strain

Pradales’ statements also touch on his ties to his parents and the extended family, with the partner’s willingness to cooperate in locating Juana’s remains cited as a point in the defense’s narrative. The document notes a long period of silence about the partner’s whereabouts and indicates that the couple lived in Ciudad Lineal during the year of the alleged crime. Allegations include that Juana’s family questioned the timeline and the severity of the charges, with arguments suggesting that the complaint may have been shaped to create an alibi. A court record confirms that the 21st Investigating Court denied Pradales’ release in March, flagging the possibility of murder charges with up to fifteen years of imprisonment if convicted.

Image of the Juana Canal provided to CASO ABIERTO by her family. OPEN STATUS

Another section of the narrative describes a moment of alleged confrontation between Pradales and Juana, with the account recounting a dispute that culminated in violence and forced silence. The defense emphasizes that two police statements were made, and that the second statement corrected the first. The account portrays a man who, despite fear, did not act with premeditation and sought to minimize the crime in his earlier accounts.

“She fell”

The early stage of the case is summarized as a sequence of events that began with a confrontation near Pradales’ home in Fuente el Saz de Jarama, Madrid. He recalls admitting to pushing Juana once, a claim he now contends did not lead to serious harm. The pivotal night of February 23 is marked as the moment the situation escalated and led to a fatal outcome.

Two police statements were obtained during subsequent interrogations, and Pradales later affirmed the accuracy of the second statement, which revised the first. He stated that fear and confusion contributed to the circumstances, with a confrontation that did not anticipate such a tragic outcome.

“I tried to carry him around like a drunk, wrapping his arm around my neck, but it was impossible”

The defendant describes attempting to move Juana’s body and the difficulty posed by the physical realities of the situation. He recounts dragging her, then placing the body in a tub and dismembering it. He describes cleaning the bathroom, removing evidence, and writing a note that would later be found by his eldest son. This period culminated in a decision to bury the remains and return home, followed by years of silence.

Pradales explains that his actions were driven by an inability to deal with the aftermath and a fear of consequences. The account states that he sought to dispose of the body but was hampered by the physical limits of the moment, leading to a drastic, fatal sequence that would echo across years of investigation.

A photo of Juana Canal beside the note found by her eldest son. OPEN STATUS

As the case moved forward, Pradales faced continued scrutiny and a forensic timeline that questioned the stability of the family’s situation. His silence for nineteen years, the defense argues, demonstrates a resolve not to seek parole easily, while the authorities stress that no full remains have been recovered. The public record notes that Juana was 38 years old, had two children from a prior relationship, and had just begun to settle into Madrid’s Ciudad Lineal area before the events of that night in February. The case remained active, with updates and evolving evidence continuing to shape the judicial process. The discovery of Juana’s remains by hikers in 2019 and the family’s notification in 2022 added layers of complexity to a case that had lingered for nearly two decades.

No time to read?
Get a summary
Previous Article

Canada, Ukraine, and the IMF: A North American View on Aid and Monitoring

Next Article

{"title":"export controls on eleven entities; Russia, China, Myanmar, Nicaragua"}