Alves found guilty of nightclub rape and jailed for 41⁄2 years

Dani Alves, one of the most successful football players of his generation, has been 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 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 ($262,000) 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.

“We are satisfied,” David Sa´enz, 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 said Alves raped her in the bathroom of a Barcelona nightclub. o 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 threeday 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 jail sentence for Alves while the lawyers representing his accuser wanted 12 years. His defence asked for his acquittal or, if found guilty a one-year sentence plus €50,000 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 penalised 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 favourably for Alves that he had “before the trial paid the court €150,000 to be given to the victim without any conditions attached”.

Sa´enz 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 posttraumatic trauma. “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.