Daniel Alves is released after friends pay bail, according to Spanish newspaper

As reported this Tuesday (26), thanks to the old “broderage” which, particularly in football, has served to cover up sexual abuse, the player Daniel Alves, convicted of rape, was able to pay the bail stipulated by the Spanish Court and was released this Monday (25). Alongside the football world’s eloquent silence on the case, the episode is yet another to show the tolerance and trivialization that machismo created and feeds around violence against women.

The stipulated amount — 1 million euros, or R$5.4 million reais — would have been paid, according to the Spanish newspaper The vanguard, by a group of the player’s friends, whose names were not revealed.

Despite having assets estimated at R$300 million, Alves had his assets blocked due to the rape case in Spain and a legal dispute with his ex-wife in Brazil.

Read too: Bail to release Daniel Alves helps to trivialize violence against women

With the release of the player — who had been imprisoned since January 2023 — he will be able to be released until the end of the appeals trial. The retention of his two passports (Spanish and Brazilian) was also ordered and it was determined that Alves could not come within a kilometer of the victim or communicate with him.

Last week, after the court established the possibility of bail, the victim reportedly told lawyer Ester García López: “I feel like they raped me again. I’m tired of being strong, I don’t want to be strong anymore.”

Values ​​involved

It was not the first time that huge figures like this permeated the trial and were used in an attempt to mitigate the severity of the aggression. Alves had his sentence reduced by half of what had been requested by the Public Ministry of Spain, to four and a half years in prison, after having the “mitigation of reparation for damages”, in the amount of 150 thousand euros (R$ 800 thousand), paid to the victim by player Neymar Jr. and his family, when his colleague was on trial.

In the understanding of the Court, the payment would manifest the “desire for reparation” in relation to the crime. It is worth remembering that, in the words of the Court itself — which found Alves guilty —, “the defendant abruptly grabbed the complainant, threw her to the ground and, preventing her from moving, penetrated her through the vagina, despite the complainant having said that no, that he wanted to leave.”

Read too: Cuca talks about rape accusation and says there is a cover-up in football

Later, after the conviction, it was reported that Neymar’s father had considered paying bail — the case had wide repercussions and, as a result, he ended up denying the information.

In an attempt to avoid being judged, Alves still sought a negotiated exit with the victim last year. The agreement was rejected by the prosecution and, at the time, the young woman’s lawyer stated that “any offense against sexual freedom causes moral damage and irreparable consequences”.

Reactions

In Brazil, a country where every eight minutes a woman is raped — totaling 34,000 in the first half of last year alone, according to the Brazilian Public Security Forum — the case has sparked outrage, especially from leaders and authorities involved with the fights to end rape culture and gender-based violence.

Among the voices raised against bail is that of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. After the Spanish court stipulated the amount to be paid, Lula declared: “The money that Daniel Alves has, the money that someone may have, cannot buy the dignity of the offense that a man does to a woman by committing rape.”

The Minister of Women, Cida Gonçalves, also rejected the release: “Convicted of rape, Daniel Alves leaves prison after paying bail. No money pays for a woman’s integrity and dignity. Therefore, there is no bail that can account for the brutality of rape, one of the most cruel violations of women’s human rights,” she declared on social media.

Federal deputy Daiana Santos (PCdoB-RS) declared: “The victim didn’t want the money, he wanted justice! Justice didn’t care about the victim. She wanted the money. This case is a mockery of all women and exposes how in many parts of the world men, rich and powerful, are in charge.”