The man judged for the death of Ana Buza, the young woman who lost her life in September 2019 at the age of 19 while traveling with her then-boyfriend along the stretch of the A-4 highway as it passes through Carmona, has declared that he did not try to run her over, as the family claims, but rather attempted to "save her" when she fell from the vehicle in an attempt to take her own life.
The girl's relatives, on the contrary, maintain that he wanted to kill her as the outcome of a "toxic and tortuous" relationship that, according to their version, he had with the victim. The prosecutor in the case, however, has emphasized that, despite her 16 years of experience as a prosecutor specialized in gender violence, she considers the hypothesis that the accused deliberately killed her to be "unsustainable."
The oral hearing with a jury, which began this Friday, has caused nearly twenty people belonging to feminist groups to gather outside the courts of Prado de San Sebastián.
Dressed in t-shirts and carrying banners that read "Enough of femicides," "They are not outbursts, they are murders," or "Justice for Ana Buza," the attendees remained silent, responding to the request of the young woman's father, Antonio Buza, who in statements to Europa Press thanked the support but demanded that the Provincial Court "not become a circus."
Ana's father has decided not to be present at this first session. He explained to this media outlet that, on a day that reopens a particularly painful case seven years later, in which it is attempted to clarify whether the young woman fell from the car by herself or if her partner ran her over after getting out of the vehicle during a heated argument, he needed to walk, accompany his wife, "talk to God in silence," and "thank Him for everything He has done and does for the family," before testifying next week, as is scheduled.
Who did attend the Provincial Court was the mother of the accused, visibly affected, along with the father of the defendant and his current partner, who preferred to stay sheltered among their companions.
"LEAVE PREJUDICES OUT"
In her initial presentation, the magistrate addressed the Jury Court to request that they keep "an open mind" throughout the trial and that they not be influenced by "interviews in the media or videos on social networks" disseminated over the years, as a result of the great media impact of the case.
The judge has ordered the jury members to stand up to take an oath, an unusual gesture because it is normally done before entering the courtroom and in a reserved space, and has asked them to "leave the prejudices outside" and base their verdict "exclusively" on what is presented in the upcoming sessions.
THE PROSECUTION'S VERSION
In the preliminary allegations phase, the prosecutor presented a harsh argument in which she emphasized that "there is no objective evidence" to conclude that it is a willful homicide, a criminal classification that the private prosecution claims subsidiarily.
As she explained, the expert reports provided by the Public Prosecutor's Office confirm that "Ana was not run over, but rather got out of the moving car."
The prosecutor insisted that it is "unsustainable" to claim that Rafael killed Ana, as, in her opinion, it was a "normal" couple's relationship in which "they cared for each other, shared time, and had normal arguments," despite the fact that the prosecution would have tried to "construct a narrative in which Rafael is a possessive and abusive man."
To reinforce her position, she recalled that she has worked for 16 years as a gender violence prosecutor. "I have accused several men for this type of cases. If I haven't done it here, it's because there was no evidence to do so."
The Public Prosecutor's Office argues that Rafael engaged in "negligent" driving by traveling at 117 kilometers per hour on a deceleration lane limited to 80, "during the night and in a heated argument" in which Ana "jumped out of the moving car," failing to uphold the duty of care that "any driver must maintain." The prosecutor posed several questions to the jury: "If the driver had respected the traffic rules, would Ana have died? What happened inside that vehicle? Why did she jump?".
THE FAMILY'S VERSION
The document from the private prosecution, representing the family, read in court, states that Ana got out of the car that Rafael was driving when he stopped during the journey to Carmona, where her parents reside. Afterwards, while she was walking on the exit lane of the A-4 towards the municipality, he would have run her over "intentionally."
The lawyer has focused on the different explanations that the accused has been giving throughout the investigation: first, that he was distracted by "a noise"; then, that "an animal crossed his path"; and finally, the defense's thesis that Ana voluntarily decided to jump out of the moving car.
"Do you think that if Ana had decided to jump out of the vehicle after a discussion with her parents about her school grades, as the defense claims, she would have given so many contradictory versions?" the lawyer posed to the jury.
She also highlighted an email that the young woman sent to the school counselor days before dying, in which she warned of episodes of "violence" that would have represented a "turning point" in the relationship, to the extent of feeling "harassed."
According to the family, the relationship between the two was "toxic and torturous" and the investigated person exercised "unbearable control" motivated by "pathological jealousy," even preventing her from "interacting with any person of the opposite sex."
THE DEFENSE'S VERSION
The defense, for its part, has rejected both the prosecution's approach and that of the private prosecution and claims that it is "erroneous" to assert that the accused was driving at 80 kilometers per hour on a road not authorized for that. It asserts that he was driving normally, at 117 kilometers per hour, on the A-4 when, "after hearing a loud bang, he felt the back door open, noticed that Ana wanted to jump out of the moving vehicle" and, while maneuvering to "try to save her," lost control of the car, then veering into the deceleration lane.
The lawyer has defended that Rafael was driving "normally" and has accused the family of crafting a "distorted" version of what happened, emphasizing that his client did not try to run over Ana, but rather tried to "save" his partner, with whom, he claims, they were "very much in love."
He added that both Rafael and the young woman's parents were aware of her "recurrent suicidal thoughts" and that she would have asked for help on several occasions.
The accused faces a request for three years in prison from the prosecution for a crime of negligent homicide. Ana Buza's family demands 20 years in prison, considering that the events constitute a crime of murder or, alternatively, of intentional homicide. The trial schedule provides for witness statements on the 21st and 22nd, expert testimonies on the 23rd, 24th, 25th, and 28th, and the appearance of the accused on the 29th.