HE tried for the theft of 45 bottles of fine wine at a notable Cáceres venue
The case centers on a bold theft from the Atrio de Cáceres restaurant in October 2021. Prosecutor Carmen Barquilla presented strong indicators that Constantin Dumitru and Priscila Lara Guevara were the perpetrators, citing multiple lines of evidence that tie them to the robbery. The prosecutor argued that the pair showed a clear pattern of involvement and that the wine’s value supported their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Before Judge Joaquín González Casso adjourned, Constantin Dumitru spoke in his own defense, maintaining that he and his partner were innocent. He referenced his and Priscila’s mobile devices, noting there were no photos or chats that corroborated the events. He questioned the reliability of expert findings and criticized the absence of security cameras inside what is described as a highly secure winery environment.
The final day of the Cáceres County Court hearing featured testimonies from five experts. They confirmed the value of the stolen vintages while assessing the wines themselves. DNA analysis found in a hotel bathroom, room 107, matched the defendants, according to reports from Priscila and Constantin and investigators from Madrid who analyzed cellular remnants associated with an unknown third person.
Facial recognition analysis also played a role, with investigators from the science police confirming similarities between the defendants and images captured during their arrest. However, the photos were checked against passport records rather than the security camera footage, which was of limited quality and not definitively conclusive.
An expert report on the stolen wines indicated that the three Michelin-starred evaluator commissioned by the insurer on October 28, 2021, concluded a meticulous methodology. The final assessment, dated February 22, 2022, reflected careful procedures and professional guidance, aligning with industry practices for rare and valuable wines.
The analyst also noted the influence of distribution channels and auction house activity as part of the report. The appraised value of the 45 bottles reached 753,454.45 euros, aligning with the market value seen in similar prestigious wines and corresponding with compensation arrangements made between Atrio and the insurer Real.
Results of the parties
Prosecutor Barquilla seeks four years and six months of imprisonment for each defendant on charges of forcibly robbing a public establishment, emphasizing the extensive nature and historical value of the stolen items. The request also includes compensation from the insurer for the assessed wine value or the return of the bottles themselves.
Throughout the trial, the prosecutor asserted that the sentence should be proportionate and appropriate. While there is evidence pointing to the defendants as the robbers, multiple elements are not direct proof of guilt, yet witnesses, experts, and their interlinked findings place the defendants in room 107 of the Atrio hotel on the night of the theft.
DNA traces, fingerprints, phone analyses, ownership data on a used car, and security records collectively implicate the room’s occupants as the culprits. The prosecution noted that a phone call to the hotel reception was made to arrange food, after which the perpetrators proceeded to the cellar with a backpack and two bags. The court faced technical difficulties in accessing security footage, limiting their ability to review the footage as requested by the prosecutor.
The investigation was described as rigorous in safeguarding the rights of the accused. The evidence was said to be extensive and interconnected, forming a web that supported the allegations of robbery against the defendants, with the facts pointing to their presence in the Atrio hotel cellar during the critical hours.
The special prosecution, represented by the insurer Real through Rafael Mateos, argued that the expert valuation of the bottles was objective. Atrio seeks 753,454 euros in reimbursement and the return of the stolen bottles, along with a potential five-year prison sentence for the defendants.
“Many irregularities”
The defense, led by Sylvia Córdoba, pressed for dismissal on grounds of numerous irregularities in the investigation. The defense contended that the case could not rest on a single piece of evidence, and that the evidence presented did not conclusively establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Requests were made for the immediate release of the defendants, who have remained in Cáceres prison since the previous summer. The lawyer argued that fundamental rights may have been violated and that the extensive phone traffic surrounding the hotel on the night in question raised privacy concerns for many residents of Cáceres.
Additionally, the defense claimed that the chain of custody over the defendants’ phones was compromised and that the loss of data did not advance the investigation, potentially altering information for investigative convenience.
The defense noted that the registries contained material of poor quality and did not clearly differentiate any individual. They also questioned the plausibility of carrying 45 bottles in two gym bags and raised doubts about the magnetic access card used to enter the wine storage area, suggesting it may have been used by others staying at the Atrio property.
The attorney argued that there were no visible security cameras inside the winery and that recording delays were not supported by technical reports. They suggested the possibility that what was described as a robbery might instead be categorized as theft. There was no official statement asserting prior visits by the defendants to the hotel, and the DNA found in the room remained unexplained to the defense.
Critiquing the valuation report, Córdoba stated that her clients were not extravagant wine collectors and stressed that the report looked like a later addition to the case. She concluded that reasonable doubt must prevail in the absence of solid evidence, insisting that the burden of proof rests with the prosecution and a crime cannot be established without clear, convincing evidence.
Overall, the trial underscored the tension between expansive forensic work and the need for demonstrable proof that withstands scrutiny in court. The outcome will hinge on how the court weighs the DNA, fingerprints, electronic data, and the reported market value of the wines in light of the arguments presented by both sides.