The Supreme Court of Justice overturns Dani Alves's conviction and acquits him of sexual assault.

The High Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC) has unanimously overturned the conviction of soccer player Dani Alves for sexually assaulting a woman at the Sutton nightclub in Barcelona. The three female judges and the male judge who make up the full appeals chamber of the TSJC and who reviewed the sentence believe that the complainant's testimony is not sufficiently conclusive to support the case. the four and a half year sentence imposed by the Barcelona Court in Alves. Friday's ruling acquits the footballer and criticizes the judges who handed down the sentence for having "inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and contradictions." The ruling is not final, and legal sources indicate that the Prosecutor's Office intends to appeal to the Supreme Court.

With this decision, the TSJC judges have accepted the appeal filed by Alves' defense against the sentence that convicted him in February 2024. They also rejected the appeals filed by the Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution, representing the complainant, who requested an increase in the sentence to 9 and 12 years, respectively. The ruling also rescinds the precautionary measures Alves was serving: after spending more than a year in prison, was released on condition that he report to court every week and deposit his passport.

The TSJC magistrates who overturned the sentence justify their decision on the alleged "lack of reliability of the complainant's witness." According to them, the young woman's version of events does not coincide with some moments recorded by the security cameras that the magistrates who convicted Alves already consulted. They refer to what happened before entering the private bathroom where the young woman reports that the footballer raped her: both she and her cousin and friend who accompanied her explained that it was an "uncomfortable situation," but the judges emphasize that this is not evident in the images because they are seen dancing.

Credibility of the complainant

The Barcelona Court of Appeals that heard the case noted this "discretion" in the young woman's account, which has been consistent since the day she filed the complaint, unlike Alves, who has exonerated himself with different versions. The judges of the Barcelona Court argued that this "discretion" could be "a mechanism for avoiding the facts, for trying not to accept that she had put herself in a risky situation," for not tormenting herself by thinking that she could have prevented the attack. They also pointed out the likelihood that the young woman did not want to admit that she had voluntarily been left alone with Alves for fear that this would lead to her complaint being disbelieved, but acknowledged that this did not affect "the essential core" of her explanation about what happened once she was inside the bathroom. They also noted: "The fact that she danced suggestively, that she moved her buttocks closer to the accused, or that she was able to embrace him cannot suggest that she gave her consent to everything that might happen later."

However, the judges of the TSJC (High Court of Justice) now criticize the Barcelona Court for having given credibility to the girl's explanation of the assault while inside the bathroom. For the judges who reviewed the sentence, the "disvergence" between the young woman's explanation and what they conclude from the premises' security cameras "seriously compromises" the reliability of their witness, including regarding what happened while they were in the bathroom.

More evidence would be needed.

According to the judges who reviewed the sentence, this does not completely invalidate the complainant's version, but it does require further verification with other evidence. During the investigation of the case, DNA tests were carried out and fingerprints were collected from the bathroom to compare whether the location and position of the couple matched the complainant's version and that of Alves, who defended himself in court by saying that they had consensual sex.

One of the details on which the girl's and the footballer's explanations differed was whether or not there was fellatio—she said no, while he said yes.- And now the TSJC (High Court of Justice) is criticizing the Barcelona Court of Appeal for having fallen into the "contradiction" of stating in the same ruling that there was one and that there wasn't. DNA traces in the girl's mouth indicated that there was, but the judges indicate that they were not entirely conclusive either because the forensic experts themselves explained that they could not know for certain whether the genetic material belonging to Alves found in the girl's mouth was semen or saliva.

For the TSJC, the results of the fingerprint tests are also insufficiently consistent, because they place the two of them in the bathroom but do not clarify whether it was consensual sex or an assault. The complainant's version is also supported by her friend and cousin with whom she was partying that night, but in the judges' opinion, they were "inaccurate" when it came to explaining the uncomfortable atmosphere that developed before Alves and the complainant went to the bathroom.

For all these reasons, the court believes there is insufficient evidence to say with certainty that Alves committed the crime of sexual assault. They themselves recall that, as in all trials, what must be proven for a conviction is the prosecution's thesis, and not the defense's because there is an acquittal. "Therefore, we do not affirm that the true hypothesis is the one maintained by the defendant's defense. What we affirm is that, based on the evidence presented, it cannot be concluded that the standards of the presumption of innocence have been exceeded."

"A legal and social setback"

After receiving the sentence, the complainant's lawyer, Ester García, criticized the ruling as a "legal and social setback" that could "discourage women from reporting the assaults they suffer." She said her client is "sad" and felt "as if she were going back to the bathroom." The lawyer criticized the fact that the accused's account is being "questioned" by "blurry and distant" cameras at the nightclub. "What matters are the facts, not what happened before and after," she said. In this regard, she stated that the ruling is "legally appealable," but that they must discuss it with the complainant because it would prolong this suffering.

For her part, Alves's lawyer, Inés Guardiola, welcomed the ruling. "Of course we expected it; he's innocent, and it's been proven. We're very excited," she said in an interview on RAC1. Far from the criticism the ruling sparked from feminist perspectives, Concha Roig, co-spokesperson for the association Judges for Democracy (JJpD), believes the ruling made public this Friday is "courageous." In an interview with Europa Press, she denied that it lacks a gender perspective. She also stated that, following the ruling, victims should not be told they shouldn't report the matter.

The ruling has also provoked political reactions. The regional minister for Equality and Feminism, Eva Menor, expressed her "concern" that the justice system "repeatedly calls into question the credibility" of victims of gender-based violence. The Minister for Equality, Ana Redondo, also spoke out, lamenting: "Once again, the victim is being questioned; once again, a man's word prevails over a woman's."