Rape: Convicted Ex-Brazil Barcelona Star, Dani Alves Seeks Release On Bail

Former Brazil international footballer convicted for rape, Dani Alves, has asked the court to release him on bail while his appeal against a four-and-a-half-year rape sentence is being heard in Spain.

Naija News reports that the request was made during a closed-door hearing at a Barcelona court, where Alves’ legal representation, led by lawyer Ines Guardiola, presented their arguments.

Alves, who has been in pre-trial detention since January 2023, communicated with the judges via video conference from prison.

His lawyer argued that the footballer had already served a quarter of his sentence, highlighting the duration of his pre-trial detention.

In an effort to secure his temporary release, Alves’ legal team proposed a bail payment of 50,000 euros (approximately $54,000) or the surrender of his two passports as a guarantee that he’ll be staying in Spain during the appeal process.

Expressing his trust in the justice system, Alves assured the court of his intention to remain in Spain and not flee the country.

Despite his reassurances, public prosecutors opposed the bail request, citing a high flight risk associated with the player.

Dani Alves, aged 40, has had a highly decorated football career, playing for top clubs such as Barcelona and Paris Saint-Germain.

Naija News had earlier reported that the Brazilian star was sentenced on February 22, following a conviction for raping a young woman at a Barcelona nightclub in December 2022.

The case against Alves was built on the testimony of the victim, who recounted her experience from behind a screen to maintain her anonymity.

She described a violent encounter in which Alves forcibly had sexual relations with her in the nightclub’s private bathroom, despite her pleas for him to stop. This testimony painted a vivid picture of the victim’s “anguish and terror” during the incident.

The defence’s argument suggested that the victim had shown interest in Alves while they were dancing at the nightclub, insinuating a mutual “sexual tension.”

However, the court’s 61-page decision firmly stated that such an interpretation did not imply consent for any subsequent actions.