The prosecutor’s office will appeal Dani Alves’s sentence because they do not agree that he compensated the damage caused to the victim.

The Barcelona prosecutor’s office is appealing the verdict that found footballer Dani Alves guilty of sexual assault, disagreeing with the use of a mitigating circumstance in the form of compensation for damages to the victim, which the court decided and which contributed to the mitigation of the sentence.

According to tax sources, the prosecutor’s office decided to challenge the verdict that sentenced Alves to four and a half years in prison, realizing that the use of a mitigating circumstance in the form of damages was not appropriate, which the court applied, only after assessing that the player had already allocated 150,000 euros before the trial as possible compensation to the victim.

This is a technical issue and will be the only element of the appeal. Following the verdict, the use of mitigation was the issue that generated the most controversy in legal circles, as some experts questioned whether money was the only element in assessing damages, especially since the verdict ignored newspaper interviews. Alves against the victim, despite admitting that the rape caused psychological trauma to the victim.

The four and a half year prison sentence imposed on Alves was less than the nine years requested by prosecutors and the twelve years sought by the victim’s private prosecution. The reduction is explained by Alves paying 150,000 euros in compensation – more than usual for sex crimes – and the first version of the “only yes means yes” law. Since the reform brought about by the reduction of sentences, which led to the principle of “only yes means yes”, sexual assault is punishable by a minimum of six years in prison, but when Alves committed rape, the minimum sentence was four years.

Given these two counts, the court could have sentenced Alves to between four and eight years in prison, and the judges favored a sentence of six months more than the minimum.

The court itself admitted that the compensation of 150,000 euros “does not cover all the damage caused that is of a moral nature,” but appreciated the fact that Alves stated before the court that he would give this amount to the victim “regardless of the outcome of the trial. “solution”. The judges applied the mitigating circumstance simply and not very skillfully (which would have reduced the sentence to between two and four years), since the footballer has a lot of financial resources, and 150,000 euros is “a small amount compared to the assets.” » football player.