The Spanish justice system agrees to the provisional release on bail of Dani Alves

The footballer will be free while the appeals for his sentence to nine and a half years in prison for rape are analyzed.
by
sambafoot_admin
2024-03-20 12:45:10

The Spanish justice system authorized the provisional release of Dani Alves from prison in exchange for a bail of 1 million euros, while the various appeals for his sentence to nine and a half years in prison for rape are analyzed.

In the ruling, the Barcelona Court agrees to the release of the 40-year-old player “by paying a bail of 1,000,000 euros”, after which his Spanish and Brazilian passports will be withdrawn to prevent him from fleeing. The resolution indicates that the Brazilian will not be able to get closer than one kilometer to the victim and must appear in court weekly.

READ MORE 

+ + Zooming in on Dani Alves’ journey, from peaks to prison

+ + IMAGE: Statue of Dani Alves smeared in white paint following rape conviction

+ + FC Barcelona’s decision following the conviction of Dani Alves

In this way, the former FC Barcelona full-back will be able to leave the prison where he has been housed since January of last year, when he was arrested after appearing to testify regarding the complaint. Yesterday, speaking by videoconference from prison during the hearing in which he requested his release, the Brazilian promised that he will not escape the country while the various requests regarding his sentence are resolved.

Alves’ lawyer, Inés Guardiola, argued that her client has already served a quarter of the sentence imposed by a court last month when requesting provisional release. The defense appealed the sentence, understanding that the Brazilian should be acquitted, while the prosecution also appealed the ruling, but to seek a greater sentence, after requesting nine years in prison during the trial held last month.

Alves was found guilty of raping a woman in the bathrooms of the Sutton nightclub in Barcelona on the night of December 30, 2022. The footballer said there was consent and denied having been violent. However, the court rejected his version and explained that “for the existence of sexual assault it is not necessary that physical injuries occur, nor that there be evidence of heroic opposition by the victim to having sexual relations.”