Why did Dani Alves go into pre-trial detention without being tried? Can your victim waive the athlete’s allowance or does that have to be determined by the court?
The news that was broadcast in the media about the alleged serious assault of a woman last December in Barcelona, for which international footballer Dani Alves is being investigated as the alleged perpetrator, has neither a large part of the population nor legal operators and legal professionals abandoned.
Briefly, and with due caution, as the information we have comes from non-judicial media, we will now analyze some of the most notable legal aspects of the procedural actions carried out by the judicial body and the statements in the press. the dismissal of the victim to receive compensation.
In the first place, we will deal with the issue of the decision of the examining magistrate immediately agreeing to his imprisonment.
In this sense, we should point out that the Criminal Procedure Act (LECrim) empowers the examining magistrate to take a series of precautions to ensure the subjection of the subject to the proceedings, his presence during the trial and the effectiveness of compliance with the sentence dictated in his time. Among them is the imprisonment of the accused. These measures are of an exceptional nature and require the existence of specific principles, given the restrictive nature of rights, especially when deprivation of liberty is agreed upon. Its regulation is contemplated in Articles 502, 503, 504, 520 et seq. of the LECrim.
As stipulated in section 520 of LECrim, it must be conducted in a manner that causes the least harm to the detainee or prisoner in person, reputation and property. For that reason, precautionary measures have a subsidiary and instrumental character and will be linked to the duration of the sentence set in the sentence that can be pronounced at that time. It can only be agreed upon if there is no other less onerous one that can serve the same purpose, and it should only be assumed in proportion to the harm or risk that is intended to be avoided. These reasons include withholding, altering or destroying evidence; criminal recurrence or flight risk, as indicated in section 503 of the LECrim.
We are therefore dealing with a case in which the investigating judge has ruled that the facts that coincide in the case have the characteristics of a crime and that there are sufficient reasons to believe that the person under investigation is responsible for them, and that there may be a risk of escape and make the actions to follow in the process ineffective.
The specific and detailed reasons on which this decision is based will be reflected in the issued order resolving the personal situation of the accused, the contents of which we do not know as it has not been circulated.
In this case, however, this measure of total deprivation of liberty and the fundamental right to roam freely, through admission to a penitentiary center during the course of criminal proceedings, could have the following reasons:
– The characteristics of the offense of sexual assault punishable by imprisonment for more than two years.
– The possible appearance in the case of sufficient grounds to be criminally responsible for the crime.
– The social alarm of the crime allegedly committed.
– Ensure the presence of the person under investigation or prosecution in the process when a flight risk can be rationally inferred. Taking into account the nature of the offense, the severity of the punishment that can be imposed on the person under investigation, his family, employment and economic situation, his stay abroad for work reasons, the lack of extradition to other neighboring countries…
Secondly, we will refer to the information circulated in the press and on news channels about an alleged refusal or renunciation by the victim of receiving compensation for the damage suffered.
In the event that this statement is true, we would find ourselves in favor of an express, clear and final waiver of their civil rights, which could be interpreted as a sign that they are only maintaining their accusation with regard to the commission of the crime committed and their clarify deficiency. have an interest in obtaining a financial advantage by expressing their contempt for receiving the corresponding amount as compensation.
It must therefore be taken into account that he refuses to receive damages that could be due to him, both those awarded in his favor by his own lawyer and the amounts and drafts calculated and requested by the public prosecutor. Said behaviors and behaviors would, if possible, further underpin his credibility in telling the facts, by demonstrating a clear absence of intent to enrich himself.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, we must point out that, given the seriousness of the offense, an alleged crime of assault, in order to comprehensively protect the victims of these heinous crimes, Organic Law 10/2022 of September 6 establishes in its first final provision, paragraph 2 , an amendment by adding a new paragraph 2 to Article 112 of the LECrim: «however, even if civil prosecution had previously been waived, if the consequences of the offense are more serious than foreseen at the time of the dismissal, or if the dismissal is subject to relationship of the victim with any of the persons responsible for the crime, the waiver of civil action may be revoked by a court decision, at the request of the injured or injured person and after the hearing from the parties, as long as it is formulated before the crime classification process.
This article was published in ‘The Conversation’.
Source: La Verdad
I am Shawn Partain, a journalist and content creator working for the Today Times Live. I specialize in sports journalism, writing articles that cover major sporting events and news stories. With a passion for storytelling and an eye for detail, I strive to be accurate and insightful in my work.
