The judge sends Íñigo Errejón to trial for the alleged sexual assault of Elisa Mouliaá

MadridDespite the opposition of the Prosecutor's Office, the Judge Adolfo Carretero The court has decided to send Íñigo Errejón to trial for the alleged sexual assault of Elisa Mouliaá. The actress filed the complaint just over a year ago, after the then-spokesperson for Sumar resign from all public offices and leave active politics after admitting to "toxic" behavior with women. She recounted three incidents that occurred at a party in 2021, which the magistrate concluded could constitute a continuing offense against sexual freedom. "The evidence exists and was not entirely refuted by the defendant's version of events," the judge concluded after thirteen months of investigation. Now, he has imposed a €30,000 bail on Errejón—the compensation Mouliaá is seeking for moral damages—and summoned him to appear on January 15 to be notified of the opening of the trial. Elisa Mouliaá and the Specialized Association for the Comprehensive Defense of Victims of Crime—the private prosecution—are seeking a three-year prison sentence for him, but the Public Prosecutor's Office has requested that the case be dismissed and will not charge him with any crime, considering that its commission "has not been sufficiently justified."

This all dates back to October 2021. After nearly a year of communicating via Instagram and Telegram, Mouliaá attended the book launch of Errejón, who was a member of parliament for Unides Podem. Afterward, they went to a bar, and she invited him to a party she was attending. The first incident occurred in the elevator: "Suddenly and without her consent, he kissed her on the mouth, inserting his tongue all the way to her uvula, which left her unable to react," the judge recounted. Later, during the party, Errejón grabbed her arm "forcefully" and led her to a room: "Without her consent, he pushed her onto the bed, removing her bra, licking her breasts, touching her buttocks, and even taking out his penis." Mouliaá was "stunned."

Later, Errejón suggested they go to his place in a taxi. Once there, after her father informed the actress that her son had a fever, Errejón "touched and groped her again without her consent" until she asked him to stop, alluding to the law of only yes means yesThe magistrate considered her statement "plausible" and "essentially coherent," and not discredited by "vagueness or contradictions." Furthermore, he emphasized that it was corroborated by the testimonies of her father, her brother, and two friends to whom she said that Errejón was a "creep" who "went too far" and that she had to stop him, and that she "had no ulterior motive, animosity, hatred, or desire for revenge" against him. In contrast, when he testified as a suspect, Errejón countered that he did everything with the victim's consent, asserted that he let her go when she wanted, and attributed the complaint to the actress's desire for notoriety to profit from his television appearances. The investigating judge's decision to bring him to trial comes before the Madrid Provincial Court has ruled on the appeal filed by Errejón's lawyer requesting that the case be dismissed. The document, reviewed by ARA, maintained that the investigations carried out "rule out the existence of even the slightest indication of criminality" and "corroborate the fabricated account of the complainant."

The Prosecutor's Office distanced itself from this.

Along similar lines, the Prosecutor's Office is in favor of exonerating Íñigo Errejón. "While the complainant has stated that she felt inhibited and that she did not actually want the sexual encounter in the way it ultimately unfolded—a statement to which we give full credence—we understand that what has not been proven is that the accused was aware, based on the preceding events and the way the complainant acted, that the encounter was not desired," the newspaper reported.

The prosecutor maintained that, before asking him to stop—something he did on "two different occasions and in different places," at the party and at her home—she did not express her "refusal, reluctant willingness, or displeasure" with his behavior. "It is difficult to assert that the accused even considered that she did not want the fleeting sexual encounter," she added. And it concluded that acting with "extreme energy, excess, or a lack of charm and attentiveness," approaching "without restraint or tact" a person "of legal age, conscious, and in full possession of their faculties," does not make the action criminal.