The Prosecutor's Office refuses to review the sentence of almost 6 years in prison for El Yoyas for mistreating his ex-wife and their children

• Television New audios by Carlos Navarro, El Yoyas, about Fayna Bethencourt: "If I took her by the neck, it was because she deserved it"

• Courts Appointment in a forest with El Yoyas: "For a time my psychologist was whiskey"

The judicial siege on Carlos Navarro '

' is getting closer and closer.

The former Big Brother contestant decided not to go to prison at the end of last November while waiting for the Supreme Court to rule on his petition to review his

However, the Prosecutor's Office has submitted a letter to the Supreme Court in which it urges it to reject the review of the sentence and leave it, so Carlos is left with no options to avoid prison.

The Criminal Court number 5 of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria issued a search and arrest warrant in November after Carlos disregarded the request of the Justice of the Peace of Vilanova del Camí (Barcelona) on November 14 to voluntarily enter jail.

The court itself

.

When the Supreme Court did not admit the appeal, it became a final sentence and Carlos had to go to jail to serve almost six years of sentence for exercising sexist violence against his ex-wife and his two children.

However, he decided to elope and not abide by the court decision.

In statements in the middle of a forest to EL MUNDO, the former Big Brother contestant explained that he considered the sentence "unfair", since he has not committed the crimes, and that after the sentence became final, he had discovered new elements that could prove his innocence .

For this reason, his lawyer, Esteban Gómez Rovira, filed a petition for review in the Supreme Court, which is still being studied.

Specifically, Fayna's 2018 complaint places the first assault in 2013 and the lawyer believes that it "coincides" in many details with a story published by her in the book 'Cyanide and Chocolate' in 2016. In this story,

"

, narrates threats and mistreatment by a man to his wife in the presence of their young son and that to avoid aggression the minor throws a milkshake.

Fayna's complaint and her judicial statement explained the episode and assured that the convicted man told her "what do you want me to break, a rib or an arm?"

The lawyer for 'El Yoyas' presented a computerized expert report on a computer hard drive that was in the house where the story file appeared and remarks that it was last saved in 2012. "If the sentence is compared, based on his complaint, and that text could be considered plagiarism, because the story coincides, with some details changed, but the rest is textual," Navarro explained to this newspaper, for which he considers that the entire story in which bases his conviction is fabricated.

Prosecutor Opposition

Within this procedure, the Prosecutor's Office urged the court to reject Carlos' request since it considers that this expert opinion on the account written before the complaint "does not represent a new element of evidence on the basis of which the conviction can be reviewed."

"It is common knowledge that the data contained in a computer file can be subject to alteration and change,"

and details that "it is possible to know the moment of incorporation of a document into the hard drive of a computer and its title, but not the actual content of said document at that time; content that, as this Public Prosecutor has appreciated, can be altered after its incorporation while maintaining the same title".

In addition, he points out that the person "who entered the document into the aforementioned computer of the applicant for the review (which he attributes to his ex-partner Fayna)" is unknown and that this "supposed new evidence, in no way distorts the existing evidence on the multiple crimes for which he has been convicted" Carlos.

In this way, it lists the testimonial statements of Fayna and her children, photos inside a vehicle of her with redness on her neck, and in which she appears with a broken face, as well as the "recordings of conversations held between the accused and his daughter (acknowledged as true by himself), in which he admits that he has taken Fayna by the neck because she has deserved it."

The prosecutor recalls that in these conversations he calls Fayna "whore, slut, disgusting, that disgusts him" and "also makes threats" directed at his ex-wife's boyfriend.

"It is collected in the sentence (of the Court of Las Palmas) that

is a demonstration of the way the defendant reacts that, as stated The complainant acted violently every time she contradicted him and confronted him".

It also details "the forensic psychological reports issued on both Fayna and her children, which reveal the severe depressive symptoms that" the victim presents "related" to habitual abuse, as well as the high fear that the accused has, " as well as "the symptoms of sadness, fear, impotence" that "both children derived from the accused's mistreatment of their mother" present.

For this reason, the Prosecutor's Office details that the appeal for review is so "exceptional, since it has as its object the revocation of final sentences" that "its purpose is aimed at prevailing, over the final sentence, the authentic truth and, with it, material justice about the formal".

And in this case, he believes that the expert evidence presented by Carlos "is not strong enough to allow the appeal for review to be admitted" since "the data contained in a computer is susceptible to multiple manipulations and, in our case, does not show that the facts for which the applicant for the review has been convicted have not taken place, in view of the varied and clear evidence on which the conviction is based".

flawed story

Before this letter, the lawyer of 'El Yoyas' once again provided a report from the computer expert in which he contradicts the opinion of the prosecutor by assuring that in the event of "manipulation of the data in the file; said file would have kept, in effect, the title, but not its metadata, generated with the time of the Windows operating system, in which the modification date would be after the date of its creation".

In another document delivered to the Supreme Court, Carlos' lawyer makes the prosecutor ugly that "it is not the procedural moment nor is it appropriate for this review request to assess evidence" and adds that "it is evident that without Fayna's statement, the sentence would not have

".

The lawyer considers that with the published story "the version of the minor who is supposed to have thrown a strawberry milkshake at his father in 2013, at the age of 3, would also be questioned, and that precisely this party did not challenge the sentence for two minor crimes of threats and harassment, in relation to some recordings that have nothing to do with the existence of up to five prison sentences, Fayna taking great care that they were not heard"

Now the Supreme Court must decide on the review appeal, the last legal bullet that '

has left before having to decide between continuing to flee or going to prison to serve the almost six years in prison to which he was sentenced.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

• Big Brother

• THE WORLD

• supreme court

• Justice