Adif, convicted of negligence in the death of the girl from Pizarra: neither collaborated in the search for Lucía nor took security measures

• The facts "Who was going to go there to look for the girl?"

• Report The three-year-old girl who disappeared in Pizarra died from a severe blow to the head

Between 11:30 p.m. and 11:40 p.m. on July 26, 2017, Antonio Vivar and Almudena Hidalgo lost sight of their three-year-old daughter, Lucía.

They were having dinner, with other family members, on the terrace of a restaurant at the

(Málaga), when the little girl got lost.

They searched for her for hours and only found her the next day, already lifeless.

She had been run over by a train.

In that search, Lucía's parents ran into an

that could have changed the tragic outcome: the lack of cooperation from the public company Adif, the owner of the station and the railway line where the little girl died.

Adif was not in a hurry to view the images from the

, in which Lucía was later seen to appear, and neither did it adopt the corresponding security measures to prevent the accident, as ruled by the Central Contentious-Administrative Court number 4 of the National Court, which in addition to the reproach has imposed on the public company compensation of just over 176,000 euros for the damages derived from the death of the minor by estimating, partially, the appeal that the parents presented against Adif's rejection to assume any responsibility in the patrimonial claim that they formulated.

The Central Contentious Court 4 gives a severe

to the public railway company, which rejected any type of relationship between the damages claimed and its performance.

Moreover, the State Attorney, on behalf of Adif, came to hide behind the fact that Lucía's death was the result of

, who was a minor and whom they had a duty to protect.

The reproaches to Adif

But magistrate Pablo Álvarez casts down the arguments of the railway company and concludes, as the parents claimed in the appeal signed by the lawyer Marcos García Montes, that there is

between the operation of the public service and the damages claimed for the death of the blackboard girl

After the disappearance of the minor at the train station, says the ruling, "there was a

" on the part of Adif in her search and, on top of that, rail traffic was not suspended nor was the security measure of ' march in sight', which forces trains to reduce speed at a certain point.

The judge has no doubt that Adif did not collaborate in the search and thus leaves it reflected in the sentence, since, he argues, the Seville Protection and Security Center did not proceed correctly to view the recordings of the security cameras from the Blackboard station.

At first, at the request of Lucía's family, they informed her parents that nothing and no one could be seen on the tapes.

However, after a

they did confirm that the image of the little girl walking along the train tracks appeared, in the direction of Álora.

But then, as the sentence reproaches, "it was already too late."

Without having this information, Lucía's relatives organized the search in the minutes immediately after the disappearance without knowing where to start and "watching the recorded images for ten minutes was enough" to which the judge also added that "that viewing was should have done with the diligence and thoroughness that the matter required.

Judge Álvarez also considers another measure that could have been adopted by the public company and that it did not take, the

, “of utmost relevance” .

It is, he admits, a "very drastic" measure considering that he did not know if the minor had headed for the train tracks, but the mere fact that it was a possibility should have been enough to make a "justified" decision. , he says.

could be made

.

The sentence recalls the testimony of the driver who was driving the train that ran over Lucía, who said that she only saw a “dark lump”.

Similarly, Adif did not activate the 'on sight' "correctly" either.

He only did it for the circulation of trains through the Pizarra station and should, criticizes the judge, extend this measure to at least

.

Lucia, highlights the sentence, traveled three.

The family lawyer has announced that he will present this sentence in the other open procedures for patrimonial responsibility and will use it to request, in addition, the reopening of

that, at the time, was filed by the Investigating Court 10 of Malaga.

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria

Know more

• Malaga

• National audience

• Justice

CourtsDina Bousselham 'forgive' Iglesias for consulting her card files and not returning it for more than a year

TerrorismThis is how I took parental authority over my children from a jihadist

28FAlejandro Sanz and Manuel Alejandro, named Favorite Sons of Andalusia

See links of interest

• Last News

• Work calendar 2022

• Lille-Chelsea

• Juventus-Villarreal

• Indian Wells: Rafa Nadal - Reilly Opelka, live

• Arsenal-Liverpool

• Galatasaray - Barcelona