“I knew what was happening”

A major setback in Dani Alves’ attempt to get the court to reduce his sentence if convicted. Two psychologists offered by Alves’ defense had to admit this Wednesday that the player “knew what was happening” on the night of the events, despite having consumed several alcoholic drinks. Questions from prosecutor Elizabeth Jimenez and victim’s lawyer Esther Garcia played a key role in breaking down the alcoholism charges.

In the 21st section of the Barcelona court, the trial of Dani Alves continued this Wednesday, from whom prosecutors are asking for nine years in prison for sexually assaulting a young woman in the toilet of the Sutton nightclub. Private prosecution of the victim increases the sentence to 12 years, and the defense demands acquittal. As expected, the player will testify this afternoon.

The victim, her friend, her cousin, workers and managers at the Sutton nightclub and police officers present at the premises spoke at the Dani Alves sexual assault trial. Experts in the case never appeared in court. Forensic experts at the Hospital Clínic and the court encountered people hired by Alves who brutally attacked a victim who questioned her account of sexual assault.

Although the testimony of the forensic experts was framed in the usual terms of medical experts (they explained the results of the examinations performed on the young woman, her emotional state and their conclusions), the testimony of the outside experts, especially the psychiatrist hired by Alves, generated much more ratings and opinions. The psychiatrist and doctor questioned not only the victim, but also how their colleagues worked.

But what came as a surprise was the latest expert report from two psychologists hired by Alves’s defense to argue for a mitigating factor in the form of alcoholism if he is convicted, which would serve to reduce his sentence.

Answering questions from Alves’s defense, led by lawyer Ines Guardiola, psychologists explained that Alves that day drank five bottles of wine and one whiskey in a restaurant, a gin and tonic in a bar and six glasses. Cava at Sutton nightclub. . Drinking alcohol, experts say, made him “much more sociable.”

During cross-examination, the prosecutor and the victim’s attorney provided a practice session on how to disqualify an expert witness. Prosecutors managed to get psychologists to admit that they did not know how many bottles of wine Alves drank because they only had a restaurant ticket and the player was with five friends. “We can’t know,” the experts eventually admitted.

We emphasize that, in response to Garcia’s question, forensic experts admitted that the restaurant bill was provided to them by Alves’ lawyer in January of this year, which supports the contention that the alcohol bill was a last-minute item and that it must be removed. from the verdict in the case. Asked by Garcia about the consequences of drinking, the experts concluded that they were not that serious: “His cognitive abilities were slightly affected, he knew what was right and what was wrong, he knew what was going on.”