Back to home
Sports·

Andorra Tribunal Begins Trials for 2016 Futsal Brawl and 2018 Nightclub Assaults

Andorra Tribunal tries father for 2016 futsal clash with guard and two nightclub workers for 2018 assaults on three patrons post-ejection.

Key Points

  • Andorra Tribunal trials 59-year-old father for 2016 futsal brawl injuries to security guard after son's red card.
  • Father denies assault, claims self-defense; both sides seek acquittal due to faded memories.
  • Two nightclub workers tried for 2018 assaults on three patrons post-ejection, facing fines and arrest.
  • Workers deny violence, allege de-escalation; defenses argue minor infractions possibly prescribed.

The Tribunal de Corts has begun trials for two separate assaults from years past: a 2016 youth futsal brawl in Sant Julià de Lòria and a 2018 nightclub ejection that turned violent outside a venue in Andorra.

In the futsal case, a 59-year-old Portuguese resident faces charges of major and minor intentional injury against a security guard following a confrontation on 29 October 2016 at the Sant Julià sports centre. The incident stemmed from a referee's red card to the defendant's then-20-year-old son during a children's match. The father, seated in the front row, protested and initially resisted leaving. He denies entering the court, insulting the referee beyond urging him to "do his job," or threatening anyone. Video shows him exiting first, followed by other parents and the guard, leading to a physical clash at the reception area.

Accounts clash on who struck first. The defendant says the guard grabbed his chest earlier, forced him to sit, and punched him outside, prompting self-defence with punches and kicks. He sustained injuries to his eyes, knees, and ribs but did not seek treatment. Witnesses called the guard's ejection "humiliating" and "forceful," with one seeing the guard deliver the initial punch and wield a baton. The referee, testifying via video, described a typical atmosphere with no direct threats or assaults on him, though his initial report noted insults like "gordo de mierda" and "asqueroso." He retains only vague memories from a document he did not write. Both prosecution and defence seek acquittal, citing incomplete footage, faded recollections after nearly a decade, and judicial delays. The defendant's lawyer highlighted his clean record in sports since.

The second case involves two nightclub workers—a 30-year-old Andorran access controller and a 28-year-old floor staff member—accused of minor intentional injuries to three clients: two brothers and one brother's partner. The altercation unfolded in the early hours of 24 June 2018 outside the venue after ejecting an intoxicated patron on St John's Night.

Prosecutors allege the workers punched and kicked the victims outside, seeking five months' conditional nighttime arrest and a €3,000 fine for the first defendant, plus €1,500 compensation to the woman and €2,250 to her partner; and three months' arrest, a €1,500 fine, and €1,500 compensation for the second defendant. Victims sought hospital care the next day, including X-rays, for jaw, stomach, rib, and ankle injuries.

The accused deny aggression, saying they professionally removed a heavily intoxicated, vomiting client and faced hostility from the others, including spitting. They claim they de-escalated, called police, and used no violence—one wore a glove only for duties. Victims counter that after a drink dispute, one worker insulted the woman ("puta niñata") and punched her jaw; her partner was stomach-punched and twisted his ankle falling; the brother, intervening, took kicks to stomach and ribs amid adrenaline-fueled chaos.

Defences demand acquittal or reclassification as minor infractions—potentially prescribed after eight years—arguing treatments involved only anti-inflammatories like ibuprofen or enantyum, with X-rays precautionary and no curative medical need. They highlighted inconsistencies, such as imprecise injury details and timelines. Prosecutors maintain core victim accounts align, X-rays prove medical assistance elevating charges to misdemeanours, and the workers' police call undermines their no-incident claim.

With conflicting testimonies and prescription debates, verdicts in both cases remain pending.

Share the article via