Soccer star Dani Alves found guilty of rape, sentenced to four and a half years in prison
Barcelona (PTI): Dani Alves, one of the most successful soccer players of his generation, was found guilty of raping a woman in a Barcelona nightclub and sentenced to four years and six months in prison.
The former Brazil and Barcelona right back was on Thursday convicted in Spain under a new sexual liberty law that emphasises the lack of consent of the victim as key to determining sex crimes.
A three-judge panel at the Barcelona Provincial Court convicted the 40-year-old Alves of sexual assault for the incident on December 31, 2022.
The court ordered Alves to pay 150,000 euros (USD 162,000) in compensation to the victim, banned him from approaching the victim's home or place of work, and from communicating with her by any means for nine years.
''I still believe in the innocence of Mr Alves,'' Inés Guardiola, Alves' lawyer, said. ''I need to study the ruling, but I can tell you that of course we will appeal.'' Guardiola said Alves was ''calm and collected'' when he heard the verdict in court.
''We are satisfied,'' David Sáenz, a member of the victim's legal team, said, ''Because this verdict recognises what we have always known, that the victim told the truth and that she has suffered.'' The victim's lawyer, Ester García, said on Wednesday she and her client would not be present for the verdict.
The victim said Alves raped her in the bathroom of a Barcelona nightclub on the morning of December 31, 2022. The court considered it proven that the victim did not consent to sex and there was evidence, in addition to the defendant's testimony, that she was raped.
Alves denied during the three-day trial this month that he raped the woman, testifying to the court ''I am not that kind of man.'' State prosecutors had sought a nine-year prison sentence for Alves while the lawyers representing his accuser wanted 12 years. His defense asked for his acquittal, or if found guilty a one-year sentence plus 50,000 Euros compensation for the victim.
The sentence of four years and six months is near the lowest sentence for a rape conviction, which when the rape took place was penalized by four to 12 years under Spanish law. That has since been modified to six to 12 years. The court in its sentence said it considered favorably for Alves that he had ''before the trial paid the court 150,000 Euros to be given to the victim without any conditions attached.'' Sáenz said his legal team did not agree with the application of the extenuating circumstance, saying the money did not compensate the harm done to their client. During the trial, medical experts testified she was suffering from post-traumatic stress.
''Clearly (it does not compensate), but that is what the court decided,'' Sáenz said. ''We have to examine the sentence to see if its contents are adequate for his acts.'' The state prosecutor's office said it will study the verdict and consider whether to appeal.
Spain Deputy Prime Minister Yolanda Díaz said she hoped the verdict ''serves as an exemplary measure for all the sexist behaviours that women suffer in all areas of our lives.'' The Alves case was the first high-profile sex crime since Spain overhauled its legislation in 2022 to make consent central to defining a sex crime in response to an upswell of protests after a gang-rape case during the San Fermin bull-running festival in Pamplona in 2016. The legislation popularly known as the ''only yes means yes'' law defines consent as an explicit expression of a person's will, making it clear that silence or passivity do not equal consent. The law, however, initially led to reduced sentences for hundreds of sex offenders because it set up lower minimum sentences, like the one applied to Alves, before being reformed.
Irene Montero, the former equality minister who championed the ''only yes means yes'' law, welcomed the ruling.
''The sentence against Dani Alves clearly establishes that he committed sexual assault because the victim did not consent. It is the result of the feminist fight for the right to sexual freedom and for putting consent at the center,'' she wrote on X, formerly Twitter.
Guardiola based her defense during the trial on video from the nightclub security cameras that she said showed how the woman danced "with sexualized movements" that ''showed her interest'' in Alves before the alleged assault.
García, the victim's lawyer, said at the close of the trial that the new law made it irrelevant how her client may have behaved with Alves beforehand.
''I don't care (how she was dancing), when she said No', that meant No.' That is why the law was changed,'' García said. ''The debate is no longer whether the victim put up resistance.'' Alves has been in jail since being detained on January 20, 2023. His requests for bail were denied because the court considered him a flight risk. Brazil does not extradite its own citizens when they are sentenced in other countries.
The victim told state prosecutors she danced with Alves and willingly entered the nightclub bathroom, but that later when she wanted to leave he would not let her. She said he slapped her, insulted her and forced her to have sexual relations against her will.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Karnataka HC quashes FIR against three men accused of 'preaching Islam' near temple premises
Bengaluru, Jul 25 (PTI): The Karnataka High Court has quashed a First Information Report (FIR) filed against three Muslim men who were accused of "preaching Islam" and distributing religious pamphlets near a Hindu temple in Jamkhandi, Bagalkot district.
The complaint had alleged that the men attempted religious conversion by making promises of employment and passed derogatory remarks about Hinduism.
However, the High Court held that there was no substantial evidence of coercion, fraud, or inducement--criteria necessary for prosecution under the Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion Act, 2022.
The court made it clear that mere expression or distribution of religious literature does not amount to an offence unless accompanied by forceful or deceitful attempts to convert.
"The essence of a free society lies in the freedom to express, discuss, and propagate beliefs," the bench observed.
It further stated that peaceful preaching, in the absence of coercion or allurement, is protected under Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to freely profess and propagate one's religion.
Additionally, the bench noted that the complainant in the case was neither the alleged victim nor a relative of one. As per Section 4 of the 2022 Act, only an aggrieved individual or their close relatives are permitted to lodge such complaints--making the FIR procedurally invalid.
