Supreme Court Upholds 15-Year Sentence in King of Cachopo Case

No time to read?
Get a summary

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court upheld a 15-year prison sentence for César Román, widely known as the King of Cachopo, in connection with the 2018 murder of his partner Heidi Paz. Authorities say Román dismembered the body after Heidi’s disappearance, and the head and limbs were never recovered at that time.

The Criminal Chamber released the decision to the public this Thursday, confirming the Madrid High Court of Justice’s earlier verdict that the case fell under a manslaughter charge. The court rejected the defendant’s appeal that challenged the prior ruling, which in turn had found aggravating factors including kinship and gender-based elements in the crime.

Alongside the 15-year sentence, the court approved a probation period, and ordered compensation totaling 142,229 euros to Heidi’s children and 100,000 euros to her mother.

The relationship began when Heidi and César met in early April 2018 at the cider house César operated in Madrid. What started as work-bonded acquaintance quickly grew into a romantic affair, and the couple soon moved in together.

By June, Heidi began to question the durability of their relationship. She left a note explaining she needed space to think and not long after returned to her own apartment. On the morning of August 5, she called César and went to the couple’s shared address as planned.

Between about six in the morning and around four in the afternoon, the prosecution asserts that César refused Heidi’s desire to separate and killed her. The exact method of the homicide was not recorded, but the Chamber established that the act was not accidental.

Following the murder, to evade discovery and despite the apparent disrespect for Heidi’s remains, the defendant proceeded to dismantle the body to hinder identification and cause of death determination.

Román reportedly wrapped the remains in a black plastic bag, placed them in a suitcase, and arranged for a taxi to transport the belongings to an industrial warehouse in Madrid’s Usera-Villaverde district, leased by a company involved in storage operations.

During the period from August 5 to August 13, 2018, further steps were taken to obscure the corpse’s identity, including the use of caustic soda on the torso and the removal of distinctive identifiers such as silicone breast implants, to complicate recognition.

On August 13, the partially preserved body, with legs, arms, head, and neck separated, and the suitcase containing the remains, was discovered during a firefighters’ operation following a fire on the site.

That same day, upon learning of Heidi’s body being found, César halted normal communications, fled to Zaragoza, and used multiple identities to secure lodging and employment as a cook, evading initial pursuit.

Román was eventually arrested on November 16 of that year in Zaragoza, where he had been living under an alias and altering his appearance.

Family attorney Alexis Socias welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision and expressed hope that Heidi’s remains would soon be returned to her family for proper burial in Honduras, a request the court had not ruled on at that time pending further deliberation by the higher court.

Representatives for the King of Cachopo, Ana Isabel Peña stated that the ruling did not surprise them, noting that the case had highlighted failures within the justice system that needed careful review. She added that a further appeal could be pursued in higher domestic or international venues to challenge the decision on grounds of fundamental rights.

Observers emphasize that the legal process will continue through possible avenues at the Constitutional Court and possibly the European Court of Human Rights if warranted, as the defense argues for a broader reckoning of procedural protections and outcomes in Spain’s judicial system.

No time to read?
Get a summary
Previous Article

Two linked kidnapping cases surface as authorities announce multi-region arrests

Next Article

Reassessing Blue Lagoon: Reflections on Consent, Content, and Context