The Madrid Provincial Court has ordered the reopening of the case surrounding the death of Jimmy, a pivotal moment in 2014 for fans of Deportivo de La Coruña after a violent incident linked to ultras violence. The decision acknowledges that there is a solid basis of evidence suggesting that the suspects under investigation may indeed be the individuals responsible for the events, prompting a renewed judicial gaze on what happened near the Manzanares River and who played a part in the fatal sequence.
The fourth division of the court, in a ruling that drew attention from outlets such as El Confidencial and which was accessible to EFE, reversed the Madrid Court of Inquiry No. 20’s 12:00 ruling that concluded the investigation. The earlier decision had stated that no credible evidence tied any of the named suspects to the crime, effectively ending the case at that juncture. The new development shifts the landscape, inviting fresh scrutiny and the possibility of new lines of inquiry that could illuminate unresolved questions about Jimmy’s death.
In mid-December, LaLiga—an organization that conducted its own independent examination into the matter—called for independence in proceedings and asked for the continuation of a separate procedure that would see indictments issued against five defendants. Among those indicted, two were charged with injuring others, and three with murder, signaling the seriousness with which the league views the violence surrounding the event and the need for accountability.
This investigation centers on the death of Jimmy, whose body was recovered from the Manzanares River after being forcibly thrown during a clash involving the ultras affiliated with Atlético de Madrid and supporters of Deportivo de La Coruña, commonly known as the Riazor Blues, along with other Galician fans. The broader context of the incident involves a heated altercation between rival groups that ended in a grievous loss of life, with Santiago A.M. also reported to have been tossed into the river in the general melee surrounding the confrontation.
Following the latest movement in the case, the Madrid Court has revisited the procedure, noting that there are clear crime indicators and ample evidence suggesting that the individuals under investigation may be the ones identified by the accusers as having carried out the acts in question. This conclusion marks a notable turn in a case that had previously seemed to reach a standstill, and it underscores the court’s willingness to reexamine the facts and consider new or previously overlooked elements.
Prior to this, the Provincial Court had already signaled a reopening of the case after a judge had previously archived the file in 2018. That earlier decision was influenced by a request to obtain testimony from a woman who had claimed that her former partner, known as DP, had accused her a year earlier. This individual has since been linked to the contention that he was responsible for throwing a Depor supporter into the river, a claim that carried significant implications for the ongoing investigation.
Nevertheless, the magistrate later declined to credit the witness’s testimony as sufficiently reliable to prosecute anyone, arguing that the evidence presented did not meet the required threshold. The case thus remained in limbo, with authorities seeking further clarification and corroboration before moving ahead with formal charges against any party involved in the ghastly incident.
In a critical assessment of the witness’s alleged confession, the court noted that the words attributed to her were a direct, unambiguous self-incriminating statement about having thrown Jimmy into the river. The decision to treat this as a non-referential, direct admission—centered on immediate sensory perception rather than corroborating facts—was pivotal in the judicial reasoning and suggested that the investigation needed to pursue additional avenues before drawing definitive conclusions about guilt or innocence.
Despite this, the court did not instruct a new trial, instead maintaining that there was already a sufficient evidentiary foundation to prosecute the individuals purported to be involved and indicating that the existing procedural channels would continue to be employed. The emphasis remained on ensuring that the process remained comprehensive and capable of answering lingering questions about responsibility for the death.
Of note is that an expert report, requested by LaLiga, is currently awaiting completion. The outcome of that report could provide new technical insights or corroboration that would significantly influence how the case proceeds and what charges may ultimately be pursued, if any. The article that documented the fight between ultras from both sides before Jimmy’s death also reported a fine imposed by the Madrid court on 75 individuals accused of involvement in the melee, with penalties ranging from €300 to €1,350, reflecting the court’s attempt to penalize violent conduct while the larger criminal questions remained unresolved.