an affront to the dignity of the court
Cinco anos após a morte do pequeno Henry Borel, o julgamento de Jairinho desmoronou antes mesmo de começar, quando seus advogados abandonaram o plenário do júri numa manobra que o tribunal classificou como afronta à dignidade da justiça. A juíza Elizabeth Louro adiou o processo para 25 de maio, puniu a defesa com o pagamento das despesas do dia e encaminhou o caso à OAB por possíveis infrações éticas. Enquanto isso, a mãe do menino, Monique Medeiros, foi solta após anos de prisão preventiva — e a criança que morreu em 2021 ainda aguarda, no silêncio do tempo, que a verdade seja dita em voz alta.
- No momento em que o júri estava formado e as acusações lidas, os cinco advogados de Jairinho se levantaram e saíram — paralisando o julgamento antes que ele pudesse avançar uma única hora.
- A juíza chamou a conduta de 'abandono processual', condenou a defesa a pagar todas as despesas do dia e acionou a OAB para investigar possíveis violações éticas.
- A defesa alega que laudos periciais foram manipulados e apresenta mensagens extraídas do software Cellebrite como prova de que o laudo foi alterado antes de ser finalizado — contestando a própria base da acusação.
- Com o julgamento suspenso e a detenção preventiva de Monique considerada excessiva, a juíza ordenou sua soltura imediata, enquanto Jairinho permanece preso.
- O novo julgamento foi marcado para 25 de maio — uma data escolhida para evitar o período da Copa do Mundo —, mas o desfecho do caso segue profundamente incerto.
O julgamento de Jairinho pelo assassinato do menino Henry Borel entrou em colapso na manhã de segunda-feira, antes mesmo de ter começado de verdade. O júri já estava composto — seis mulheres e um homem — e as acusações tinham sido lidas em voz alta. Foi então que os cinco advogados de defesa se levantaram e abandonaram a sala. A juíza Elizabeth Machado Louro não teve escolha: dispensou os jurados e adiou o processo para 25 de maio.
Henry morreu há cinco anos num apartamento na Barra da Tijuca, com sinais de trauma físico. Jairinho era vereador à época. Ele e Monique Medeiros, mãe do menino, estavam presos desde abril de 2021. A defesa havia pedido adiamento naquela manhã, alegando acesso incompleto às provas. A juíza negou e ordenou que o julgamento prosseguisse. A saída dos advogados foi a resposta — uma manobra que, embora impedisse o julgamento, também impedia que o réu fosse julgado sem representação legal. Louro classificou a conduta como afronta à dignidade do tribunal, determinou que a defesa arcasse com todas as despesas do dia e encaminhou o caso à OAB para apuração de possíveis infrações éticas.
Com o processo suspenso, a juíza reavaliou a situação de Monique e concluiu que mantê-la presa preventivamente por mais tempo configuraria excesso ilegal. Ordenou sua soltura imediata. Jairinho, por sua vez, permanece detido.
A estratégia da defesa gira em torno da alegação de que as perícias são contraditórias e possivelmente adulteradas. Os advogados apresentaram mensagens extraídas do software israelense Cellebrite que, segundo eles, mostram comunicações entre o perito e o ex-diretor do Instituto Médico-Legal antes da finalização de um dos laudos — sugerindo que o documento foi alterado para favorecer a acusação. Se confirmado, o argumento derrubaria a própria base do caso: a prova de que Henry morreu em decorrência de atos praticados por Jairinho. O julgamento aguarda maio. A verdade, ainda mais.
The trial of Jairo Souza Santos Júnior, known as Jairinho, for the death of five-year-old Henry Borel collapsed on Monday morning before it had truly begun. The jury had been seated—six women and one man—and the charges had been read aloud. Then, in a move that would draw sharp rebuke from the bench, Jairinho's five defense attorneys stood and announced they were walking out. The judge, Elizabeth Machado Louro, had no choice but to dismiss the jurors and adjourn the proceedings. The trial, which had been scheduled to resume on June 22, was rescheduled for May 25.
The boy died five years ago in an apartment in Barra da Tijuca, on Rio de Janeiro's west side, bearing signs of physical trauma. Jairinho was a city councilman at the time. Both he and Henry's mother, Monique Medeiros, had been in custody since April 2021, a month after the child's death. Monique had been released once, in 2022, but was returned to prison in 2023 on the order of Supreme Court Justice Gilmar Mendes.
The defense had requested a postponement that morning, claiming they had not received complete access to evidence in the case. Judge Louro denied the request and ordered the trial to proceed. It was then that the attorneys abandoned the courtroom—a tactic that, while it prevented the trial from moving forward, also prevented their client from being tried without legal representation. The judge called the conduct a form of "procedural abandonment" and declared it an affront to the dignity of the court. She ordered Jairinho's defense team to pay for the entire day's expenses: the travel costs for court staff, the hotel accommodations for the jurors, and the meals for everyone involved. She also referred the case to the Brazilian Bar Association for investigation into possible ethical violations against the attorneys.
With the trial postponed and no immediate date certain for resumption, Judge Louro reconsidered Monique's detention. She concluded that holding her in preventive custody any longer would constitute an unlawful excess of the legal limit on pre-trial imprisonment. The judge noted that Monique's defense had aligned itself with Jairinho's arguments, suggesting she was engaged in the new strategy. On that basis, Louro ordered Monique's immediate release. Jairinho, by contrast, remains in prison.
The defense strategy rests on claims that the forensic evidence against Jairinho is unreliable and possibly corrupted. The attorneys argue that multiple autopsy reports contain contradictions and reach different conclusions about how Henry died. More significantly, they say they have obtained messages extracted from the Israeli software Cellebrite that show communications between the medical examiner and the then-director of Rio's Medical-Legal Institute before one of the autopsy reports was finalized. According to the defense, these communications suggest the report was altered to favor the prosecution. One of Jairinho's lawyers, Rodrigo Faucz, submitted a petition claiming the messages "prove without any doubt" that the autopsy reports were manipulated by third parties and requesting that the documents be annulled. The defense also contends that the examiner, Leonardo Tauil, admitted during questioning that he modified one of the reports after speaking with the institute's former director. If true, the defense argues, this irregularity undermines the very foundation of the case—the evidence that Henry died from injuries inflicted by Jairinho. They maintain there is insufficient evidence to prove their client caused the boy's death at all.
The postponement to May 25 was itself a concession to the calendar. The judge had initially set the new trial date for June 22, but moved it earlier after realizing that date would fall during the World Cup. Now the case sits in a strange suspension: the mother free, the accused still detained, the evidence contested, and the trial itself deferred to a date months away. What happens when the jury is finally seated again remains uncertain.
Citas Notables
The conduct of the attorneys, though motivated by disagreement, constitutes procedural abandonment and an affront to the dignity of the court.— Judge Elizabeth Machado Louro
The messages prove without any doubt that the autopsy reports were manipulated by third parties.— Defense attorney Rodrigo Faucz
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why would a defense team walk out of their own client's trial? That seems to guarantee a loss.
It doesn't guarantee a loss—it prevents a trial from happening at all. If the defendant has no lawyer, the proceedings can't continue. It's a delay tactic, and it worked.
But the judge punished them for it. Fined them, referred them to the bar association. Doesn't that make things worse for Jairinho?
In the short term, yes. But the defense is betting that the delay buys them something more valuable than a trial right now—time to challenge the evidence, to argue that the autopsy reports were tampered with, to undermine the prosecution's case before a jury ever hears it.
Do they have a real argument about the evidence being manipulated?
They claim they have messages showing the medical examiner and the institute director communicated before one of the reports was finalized. If that's true, it raises questions. But the judge didn't buy it enough to stop the trial. She called their conduct an abandonment of the legal process.
And Monique gets to go home because of this?
Exactly. The judge decided that keeping her in prison any longer while the trial kept getting delayed would be unlawful. So she released her. Jairinho stays locked up.
So the mother is free and the accused is still detained. That's an odd place to land.
It is. And it shows how fragile the whole thing is. The case hinges on forensic evidence that the defense says is corrupted. The trial keeps collapsing before it starts. Nobody knows when or how this actually ends.