Cuca é absolvido de acusação de estupro após anulação da condenação pela Justiça da Suíça
The case occurred in 1987, during the period in which the Brazilian coach was still playing at Grêmio. Cuca and three other athletes were arrested on charges of engaging in sexual activity with a 13-year-old girl, allegedly without due consent.
At the time, Cuca played as a Grêmio player - Photo Reproduction/Buda Mendes/Getty Images
Brazilian football coach Alexi Stival (Cuca) was cleared of rape charges after the Tribunal Regional from the district of Berna Mittelland, in Switzerland, to annul his conviction. This decision represents a turning point in the life of the coach, who had previously been convicted on suspicion of sexual assault on a minor during a Grêmio tour to the European country in 1987.
At the time, he was still acting as a player and three other athletes faced assault charges sexual assault against a 13-year-old girl, without her consent. A fourth player was acquitted of the specific charge of sexual assault, but was convicted of duress due to his role in the crime.
Decision
The ensuing court case was marked by twists and turns, legal challenges and considerable media attention, given the coach's status on the world football stage. The decisive turning point occurred when new evidence came to light, casting serious doubt on the integrity of the initial process. The Swiss court, in response to a request for re-examination made by the athlete's defense in May 2023, decided to reopen the case. After a detailed review, the Court accepted the defense's arguments, annulling the conviction due to irregularities identified in the 1989 process. As a result, Cuca was acquitted.
The revocation of the sentence resulted in the possibility of a new trial; however, the Swiss Public Prosecutor's Office argued that such a review would not be feasible due to the statute of limitations of the crime. In view of this finding, the body proposed the annulment of the sentence and the termination of the case. In addition to the decisions related to annulment and prescription, the judge in charge also ordered the payment of a compensation to Cuca in the amount of 13,000 francs Swiss, equivalent to around R$75 thousand at the current exchange rate. The coach stated that the revocation brought relief to the troubled period he went through.
"Today I understand that I should have dealt with this matter sooner. I am relieved with the result and convinced that the last 8 months, even though they were emotionally difficult, happened at the right time and from God", he said.
According to the Swiss court ruling, Cuca was tried in absentia, meaning he was not present and did not have legal representation. As indicated in the document, this practice constitutes a violation of article 6 of the Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to the document, every individual accused of a crime has the fundamental right to be represented by a lawyer, thus constituting the foundation of an impartial trial. The absence of the accused at the hearing does not imply the waiver of this right.
According to the decision, the essential documents of the process were not translated and explained to the athlete, who only spoke Portuguese. Likewise, the lawyer representing him at the time was also not proficient in the language. Due to this situation, the player in question was not correctly notified and was not aware of the date of the main hearing, at which crucial evidence for the case was presented.
Consequently, the criminal court based its sentence mainly on the evidence obtained during this main hearing. Given the absence or inadequate representation of the convicted individual, it was not possible for him to respond to the incriminating allegations or ask additional questions. The lack of an adequate defense led the Court to conclude that Cuca was at a disadvantage compared to the prosecuting authority, thus violating the principle of "equality of arms between the prosecuting authority and the accused". This absence of effective defense resulted in the accused's inability to adequately protect himself.
Remember the case
The episode began in 1987, during Grêmio's tour of Europe. Cuca and three teammates were arrested on charges of having non-consensual sexual relations with a 13-year-old girl. According to the local police investigation, the young woman had gone to the Grêmio players' room in the company of friends, and was then pulled inside and subjected to abuse. The four were detained for approximately a month before returning to Brazil. The trial took place two years after the events.
Cuca, Eduardo and Henrique were sentenced to 15 months in prison for indecent exposure using violence. Fernando was acquitted of the charge of indecent exposure, but was convicted for his involvement in the act of violence. Given that Brazil does not extradite its citizens, they never served the imposed sentence.Cuca always denied that he committed the rape.
