In the Tuesday session, Mossos d’Esquadra investigators briefed the jury on the evolving case surrounding Janet Jumillas and the person of interest, Aitor. The prosecutors and police outlined evidence they say ties Aitor to the crime, including traces of Janet’s blood at Aitor’s residence, fingerprint material, and surveillance details that challenge his accounts of events that day. The aim was to provide a coherent sequence of actions that would help the jury assess guilt beyond reasonable doubt, while also presenting the challenges of interpreting forensic and digital data in a complex homicide investigation.
Witness statements and forensic findings were presented as part of the ongoing investigation into the disappearance and presumed death of a 39-year-old neighbor from Viladecans. Prosecutors described Janet’s last known movements and the alleged involvement of Aitor, suggesting that he may have invited Janet to his London residence and that she was killed there. The body was reported to have been disposed of in an empty lot, with investigators outlining a timeline that places Aitor at crucial moments after Janet’s arrival at a friend’s home and during subsequent travel tied to the search for a girlfriend who worked at El Prat. These points form the core of the case against Aitor in the court proceedings observed by the Mossos and the prosecution at the Catalan court, and are cited in the official case file and ongoing legal updates.
According to the Mossos’ account, Aitor contacted a friend shortly after Janet’s death and used that opportunity to move the body from a residence. The plan allegedly involved driving Janet’s body to a location near El Prat, with the aim of concealing it while coordinating with another person who was involved at the time. Investigators report that two dogs were transported in the same vehicle and that the operation extended to coordinating with a girlfriend who worked nearby. The narrative portrays Aitor guiding the actions of others at key moments, and investigators point to the use of a car trunk and planned removal of evidence as part of the suspected cover activity. The account emphasizes the role of concealment and the involvement of multiple participants in attempting to mislead authorities about the day’s events.
“Play stupid”
The testimony includes audio recordings in which Aitor appears to instruct a friend on what to tell investigators. Prosecutors argue that this dialogue reveals an attempt to minimize responsibility by suggesting a day of casual activity and the use of marijuana, thereby offering a partial and misleading account of the events. The day’s schedule included a Champions League match that evening, which is cited as part of the context in which the alleged deception took place. Official notes indicate a focus on whether the marijuana use affected the participants’ memory or behavior on that day and whether it influenced the credibility of their statements in later questioning.
Investigators assess that one participant did not uncover the full sequence of events and that another may have joined the plan based on the circumstances described by Aitor. A person who could provide crucial testimony reportedly refused to testify, and this choice is noted within the investigative record as affecting the ability to confirm certain aspects of the alibi. The overarching concern remains whether the supposed plan to mislead the authorities was executed as alleged and whether the evidence supports a direct role for Aitor in Janet’s death.
Two and a half months
On the court’s dock, Aitor sat faced with the proceedings, eyes lowered, as police officers from the Missing Persons Center recounted their work in cases of suspected homicide or violent disappearance. The court room displayed images of the victim and forensic findings that described how multiple stab wounds and neck injuries occurred, along with markers that suggested a defensive struggle. A forensic explanation noted that the state of the body posed challenges in determining whether the attack happened from behind or if another person participated in the crime. The findings also indicated a significant blunt force impact to the face and a series of incisions that contributed to Janet’s death.
Examining the autopsy, the forensic expert highlighted the complexity of a decomposition scenario and the need to interpret the sequence of traumatic injuries. The conclusions point to a fatal combination of stab wounds and premortem trauma, with Janet bleeding as a final outcome of the injuries. The testimony reflects the ongoing difficulty in reconstructing precise moments during the crime given the body’s condition and the time elapsed since the events. These medical observations form a crucial part of the evidentiary picture presented to the court and are cited as the basis for the homicide charge facing the defendant.
Fingerprints
Forensic teams reported finding traces of Janet’s blood within Aitor’s residence, alongside evidence that included reconfigured or cleaned items bearing Aitor’s fingerprints. Investigators recovered an eyeglass lens obtained near a shopping mall in Viladecans, a detail linked to the victim’s family and household environment. Items of interest were associated with Janet’s personal effects and the location where she resided, providing physical connections to the home environment and social circle of the people involved.
Geolocation data from the defendant’s mobile devices placed him in locations around El Prat on the day in question, reinforcing the timeline proposed by investigators. Some statements from members of the social circle were inconsistent with the established timeline, and the defense has argued that the timeline contains discrepancies. The case depicts a complex interaction among individuals with varying testimonies and the challenge of aligning human memory with digital and physical traces. The record notes that Aitor may have relocated after the events and was later detained as the investigation advanced toward trial. The defense contends that the absence of a clear confession or definitive forensic linkage leaves room for doubt, and the court continues to weigh the evidence presented in the trial proceedings.
The timeline also notes disputes about Janet’s final whereabouts after the day of the incident. The body’s discovery and the ensuing investigations extended the emotional toll on the family over weeks and months, as relatives awaited closure. The case remains active, with the defendant facing trial and the possibility of a lengthy sentence should guilt be established beyond reasonable doubt, while the broader community watches for a resolution that honors the victim’s memory and the integrity of the investigative process.
Related posts:
Tragic Case in Barcelona: New Statements and Shifting Explanations in Janet Jumillas’ Death Court Receives Key Scientific Evidence in Janet Jumillas Case Reconstruction of the Sant Andreu de la Barca homicide investigation Barcelona Trial Reopens in Jumillas Case as Prosecution and Defense Lay Out Demands Major cross‑border drug network dismantled by Mossos d’Esquadra and Italian police Manuela’s Death Case: Forensic Findings Challenge Delgado’s Account Multi-Victim Family Tragedy: Mossos Investigate in Barcelona Area The core duties of the prosecutor today Court Rules on Care in Pediatric Case Tied to Aitor’s Tragic Death Murder case in Empuriabrava: German suspect detained and investigated by authorities 69-year-old Arrested in Connection with Death of 88-Year-Old Partner in Santa Perpètua de Mogoda Cross-Border Investigation and Convictions in a 2003 Murder Case