Seeing the trial, she contacted the lawyer
A major criminal case unfolds as a man accused of multiple violent offenses sits in a court that handles serious criminal matters. The defendant faces eleven charges of assault, with three fatal outcomes among them. The proceedings entered their second week, marking the sixth day of public oral testimony.
The courtroom focus centers on the first death case linked to a Brazilian victim identified as Arliene Ramos. She reportedly died after a sexual encounter with the defendant during a nighttime incident on March 31, 2019. The events took place at a brothel located on a busy city-center thoroughfare at a well-known intersection. Public and media scrutiny has intensified due to the tragic circumstances surrounding the victim and the accused’s alleged actions.
During proceedings last week, a floor manager who oversaw the venue described the victim’s distress in a witness statement, noting that the victim died in the arms of a staff member. The death was officially recorded as occurring on March 31, with later testimony indicating attempts to keep the victim breathing on life support briefly to allow family members to travel and consider organ donation, according to medical staff testimony. The victim was declared brain dead after life-sustaining measures, prompting further debate about emergency care and postmortem decisions.
One childhood friend of the deceased was expected to testify but could not be located to appear before the court. The National Police reported that the witness was outside the country at the time, with conflicting indications that the person might have been in Brazil. Despite multiple efforts, the witness could not be found to provide testimony in the ongoing investigation and in related judicial sessions.
Seeing the trial, he contacted the lawyer
In a development described as significant by the sister of the deceased, a criminal lawyer representing the private prosecution reached out to a defense attorney involved in the case. The outreach indicated that a witness had become available and wished to participate in the proceedings. This led to discussions about scheduling and the potential impact on the trial timeline, as the witness would testify before the jury as part of the evidentiary sequence.
During the fifth session of the oral hearing, the lawyer informed the court of the discovery. The magistrate called this encouraging news because it confirms that all witnesses can be slated for testimony in an orderly progression of the case. The defense argued that the witness should testify in person, while the defense team urged that certain statements by the defendant should be excluded from the record. The judge noted that the witness’s testimony would be heard if allowed in the courtroom, with the possibility of maneuvering around any objections raised by the defense.
Once resolved, the witness is expected to provide testimony today, likely as one of the initial statements in the sequence. The process is arranged so that each death-related incident is treated as a separate micro-trial within the larger macro-trial structure. This approach is designed to give jurors clarity by presenting each incident with its own sequence of testimony, expert review, and documentary evidence, ensuring a coherent and chronological presentation of the facts. (citation: court records)
By organizing the case this way, jurors will hear individual narratives of each incident, including the sequence of events, expert analyses, and documentary records. The design aims to help the jury assess each incident on its own merits while maintaining a clear overall timeline for the proceedings. (citation: court records)
Police, forensic and toxicologists
Following the deposition of Arliene’s friend, the court will proceed with the established schedule. Forensic experts and police investigators will disclose findings related to the defendant, including fingerprint and DNA analyses derived from evidence recovered at the scene. These results will indicate the current status of connections to the victim and how the events unfolded in the moments leading up to the incident described as pre-death injuries. (citation: forensic reports)
The medical examiner will present a toxicology report produced by the Valencian Institute of Forensic Medicine, though an initial blood sample taken at admission was not analyzed at first. Subsequent analyses revealed additional details about the victim’s state, including the possible presence of substances and their concentrations in the body. The toxicology team will explain the limitations of the data and how timing affects the detection of substances after the incident. (citation: toxicology board)
Additionally, experts from the National Institute of Toxicology and other forensic authorities, including specialists from the IML and the National Police Central Toxicology Unit, will provide testimony remotely by videoconference. Their findings will cover the chemical composition and purity of any substances found, the chain of custody of samples, and the methodologies used in the autopsy and related analyses. The session is expected to be lengthy and highly technical as the teams map out the forensic context for each case within the trial. (citation: expert panels)
Overall, today’s proceedings promise a rigorous examination of the complex evidence, with jurors listening to witness testimonies, reviewing expert reports, and weighing the forensic material relevant to each incident as the case unfolds in a structured, chronological format. (citation: court proceedings)