• Report Lardero's monster was released at risk of reoffending "medium-high"
  • Courts X-ray of Lardero's monster: extreme violence, sadism and... Why was he on the loose?

"We are undoubtedly facing the personification of the vilest of evils. This is a predator and a guy who has raped and murdered every time he has set foot on the street." With these words has defined the lawyer Alicia Redondo, who has represented in the so-called trial of the crime of Lardero to the family of the victim and the association Clara Campoamor, in the last session of the trial to the accused Francisco Javier Almeida, who has made use of his right to the last word.

The lawyer has reminded the jury court that the defendant in the sexual assault and murder of nine-year-old Alex was sentenced in 1993 to seven years in prison for the rape of a minor. After being released from prison for this crime, in 1998 he was again arrested and convicted of the rape and murder of a young real estate agent. "He wanted to do what he did, he's a sexual predator who satisfies his most disgusting desires. She wanted to kill Alex and killed him, she said in the reading of her final indictment, in which both she and the prosecution have reaffirmed their request for reviewable permanent imprisonment.

The prosecutor has defined Almeida, 55, as "an extremely cold person." And so, without shaking his voice or showing any kind of emotion, he has made use of his right to the last word in the final session of the trial that has been held against him in the Provincial Court of Logroño.

"I did not want to say anything while the celebration of the hearing because everything was leaked to the media and things were distorted or invented," began his version of what happened on October 28, 2021 in Lardero (Logroño). "On the day of the events, it is true that he had drunk, it is true, drinking does not affect us all equally," he insisted on the excessive consumption of alcohol, which the defense has wielded during the trial in his defense.

"I went down to the park, it's true, but not only in order to look for children or minors, no, I went down to the park because sometimes I went down to smoke. Sometimes a child spoke to me, because I spoke to him, but he did not speak for any hunting purpose, as is being said in the media and has been exposed in this room. "

Almeida wanted to dismantle in his story the version of the minors of the neighborhood, who told the police that he looked at them continuously and watched them from a window of his building. "They are coming to insist that it overlooks the park and it is not true. From the window you can't see the park or see the minors."

And so he has told how he approached Álex: "The day of the events, it is true that I went down to the park, I had no intention of anything, it is true that I saw Alex wandering around and such, and well, I told him, it came out like this: 'Do you want me to show you a bird that I have at home, so you can see how beautiful it is?' I didn't say any more to him, I didn't force him, I didn't force him, I didn't grab him."

Impassive too, without breaking his voice, he has narrated how the alleged sexual assault occurred, which he denies, and the death of Alex. "Once we are on the floor, Alex saw the bird, it was very beautiful, you liked it a lot. At that moment I began to have a certain fantasy. Let's see, it is being said that if I put the penis that if I did not put the penis, that if such ... All I did was show him his penis and pass it over his face," he said, denying that he had ejaculated in Alex's mouth, as the prosecutor and the private prosecution maintain based on the analyzes of the National Institute of Toxicology, which detected sperm inside the child's mouth. "There is no evidence that I have ejaculated on Alex. What is found is seminal flow. When I didn't have an erection or anything, the seminal flow came out, there couldn't be sperm because I didn't ejaculate, I didn't ejaculate."

At that moment, Almeida has continued his version, he began to hear fuss in his building. It was the police officers and Alex's relatives who were looking for him. "You started hearing noises, like bells. I don't know for sure, but I know [Alex] wanted to run away and I grab him by the shirt from behind, it's true. With one hand I covered his mouth and with the other, it is true, that I put it like that on his neck, but without squeezing, because I had no intention of killing him, none, and he moved and that's why he has those frictions on his neck, "he said about the marks on the child's neck, which, According to specialists, they are due to a violent strangulation that caused his death by asphyxiation.

Without mutating the gesture or the tone of voice, absolutely calm, he explained that when he realized that the child had lost consciousness, he went out in search of help. "Not as they say around here, that I still wanted to get him in the car, that I still wanted to hide it. No, I would go out and ask for help. I went out with the zipper down and I didn't put on my coat either. I wanted to ask for help," he told the court. "I went down stairs with the child in my arms, I did not cover him, nor did I put a sheet on him, nor did I put him in a sports bag ...", he insisted in his defense and in line with the defense of his lawyer, who requests that the mitigating circumstances of recognition of the facts and reparation of the damage be applied.

He has also referred to the instance that he presented in the prison of Logroño and in which he recognized himself as the author of the death of Álex: "I am the one who has killed the child of Lardero", he said in the writing. "I threw the instance in Logroño because I repented, I regretted, it was not precalculated, I really regretted it," he concluded before asking "forgiveness to all those who have hurt and to the family."

According to The Trust Project criteria

Learn more