Twenty-three separate injuries across the child's body
Cinco anos após a morte de Henry Borel, uma criança de quatro anos cujo corpo carregava vinte e três marcas de violência, o julgamento de seu padrasto — o ex-vereador Jairinho — volta a ser adiado, desta vez sob a justificativa de que um de seus advogados sofreu um infarto. A justiça, como tantas vezes acontece nos casos que mais pesam sobre a consciência coletiva, caminha entre o direito à defesa e o dever de não deixar o tempo apagar o que os fatos já revelaram. O Ministério Público resiste ao adiamento, lembrando que este não é o primeiro obstáculo processual erguido pelo réu, e que a criança que não pôde se defender merece, ao menos, que o tribunal avance.
- Jairinho pediu novo adiamento do júri alegando que seu advogado foi hospitalizado após um infarto dias antes da sessão — mas a promotoria enxerga no pedido mais um capítulo de uma estratégia de procrastinação.
- O julgamento já havia sido interrompido em março, quando a defesa abandonou o plenário, forçando um adiamento anterior — padrão que agora pesa contra a credibilidade do novo pedido.
- Henry morreu com hemorragia interna e laceração no fígado; vinte e três lesões documentadas no corpo de um menino de quatro anos contradizem frontalmente a versão de acidente sustentada pelos réus.
- A promotoria propõe seguir em frente mesmo sem a defesa completa de Jairinho, separando os julgamentos se necessário para que o caso de Monique Medeiros não seja novamente paralisado.
- O tribunal do Rio de Janeiro precisa decidir se concede mais tempo à defesa ou se, finalmente, leva o caso a seu desfecho — cinco anos depois da morte de Henry.
Na manhã de 25 de maio, o segundo tribunal do júri do Rio de Janeiro voltou a reunir os casos de Jairinho e Monique Medeiros, mãe de Henry Borel, ambos acusados pela morte do menino em março de 2021. Logo no início da sessão, Jairinho anunciou a retirada do advogado Fabiano Tadeu Lopes de sua defesa — o profissional havia sido internado após um infarto dias antes do julgamento. O réu alegou ter tomado conhecimento da situação somente após confirmar a data do júri, e argumentou que Lopes detinha informações essenciais sobre três processos sigilosos relacionados a testemunhas que seriam ouvidas durante o julgamento. Sem ele, disse a defesa, o direito a uma defesa plena estaria comprometido.
O promotor Fábio Vieira dos Santos não aceitou o argumento sem contestação. Ele lembrou ao tribunal que em março a defesa já havia provocado um adiamento ao deixar o plenário abruptamente, e que permitir nova postergação seria ceder a uma sequência de manobras processuais. Sua proposta foi direta: o julgamento deveria prosseguir, e se necessário, os casos de Jairinho e Monique poderiam ser separados, com o de Medeiros avançando de forma independente.
O peso do caso vai além das disputas jurídicas. Henry morreu de madrugada no apartamento da família em Barra da Tijuca. Sua mãe e seu padrasto disseram às autoridades que o encontraram inconsciente e o levaram ao hospital, onde os médicos constataram hemorragia interna e laceração no fígado. A versão oficial era a de um acidente doméstico. O laudo pericial, porém, registrou vinte e três lesões distribuídas pelo corpo da criança — um quadro que tornava a hipótese acidental insustentável.
Depois de anos de investigação, indiciamentos e adiamentos, o julgamento chegava enfim ao limiar de um veredicto. A decisão sobre o pedido de Jairinho caberia ao tribunal: conceder mais tempo à defesa ou determinar que a busca por justiça para Henry não poderia esperar indefinidamente.
The courtroom in downtown Rio de Janeiro fell quiet on Monday morning as Jairo Souza Santos Júnior—the former city councilman known as Jairinho—stood to request yet another delay in his trial for the death of Henry Borel, the four-year-old boy he had raised as a stepfather. The reason: one of his lawyers had suffered a heart attack days before the jury was set to convene.
The trial resumed at 9 a.m. on May 25th at the city's second jury tribunal, bringing together the cases of Jairinho and Monique Medeiros, Henry's mother, both accused in connection with the child's death on March 8, 2021. During the session, Jairinho announced he was removing one of his attorneys from the case—Fabiano Tadeu Lopes, who had been hospitalized after his cardiac event. Jairinho claimed he had only learned of Lopes's condition after confirming the trial date, and that Lopes held crucial knowledge about three sealed cases involving witnesses who would testify during the proceedings.
Jairinho's argument hinged on a familiar legal principle: that without his full legal team present and prepared, he could not adequately exercise his right to a proper defense. The implication was clear—he wanted the trial postponed until his legal strategy could be fully reconstructed. But the prosecution saw something different in the request. Prosecutor Fábio Vieira dos Santos reminded the court that this was not the first time Jairinho's defense had sought delay. On March 23rd, his legal team had walked out of the courtroom entirely, forcing an adjournment then as well. The prosecutor argued that the trial should proceed regardless, and if necessary, Jairinho could be tried separately from Medeiros, with her case moving forward independently.
The case itself carries the weight of a nation's attention. Henry died in the early morning hours in his family's apartment in Barra da Tijuca, on Rio's west side. His mother and stepfather told authorities they had found him unconscious and rushed him to the hospital, where doctors discovered he had died from internal bleeding and a lacerated liver. The official story was an accident—a fall, perhaps, or some domestic mishap. But the medical examiner's report told a different story. The autopsy documented twenty-three separate injuries across the child's body, a pattern that contradicted any simple accident narrative.
What followed was a complex investigation that would eventually lead to charges against both Medeiros and Jairinho. The prosecution's case rests on the forensic evidence: the sheer number and distribution of injuries, the nature of the internal trauma, the timeline of events. The defense maintains their account of an accident, but the physical evidence has consistently worked against them. Now, as the trial finally moved toward a verdict, Jairinho sought to buy more time, citing his lawyer's health crisis as grounds for delay.
The prosecutor's position was pragmatic and pointed. He acknowledged the difficulty but insisted that justice for Henry could not be indefinitely postponed by procedural maneuvers. The court would need to decide whether Jairinho's request for additional preparation time would be granted, or whether the trial would move forward with the legal team he had available. Either way, the case that had gripped Brazil for years was finally approaching its reckoning.
Notable Quotes
Jairinho argued he could not adequately exercise his right to defense without his full legal team present and prepared— Jairinho's position during trial
The prosecution stated it wanted to proceed with the trial regardless of the defense's setback, potentially trying the defendants separately if necessary— Prosecutor Fábio Vieira dos Santos
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does the timing of the lawyer's heart attack matter so much here? Couldn't Jairinho just bring in another attorney?
In theory, yes. But Jairinho's team claims this particular lawyer—Fabiano Lopes—had special knowledge of sealed court documents involving witnesses who will testify. That's not easily transferred. It's not just about having a body in the courtroom.
So the prosecution sees this as a delay tactic, not a genuine hardship?
Exactly. The prosecutor pointed out that Jairinho's defense walked out of court back in March to force an adjournment. This is the second time. At some point, the court has to ask: when does the trial actually happen?
What about Henry's mother—Monique? Is she also trying to delay?
The sources don't indicate that. She's a co-defendant, but her legal strategy appears separate. The prosecutor even suggested they could try her case alone if Jairinho keeps stalling.
That seems harsh—splitting the trial of two people accused in the same death.
It is. But the prosecutor argued it follows procedural logic. Two defendants, one crime, but if one keeps blocking progress, the system has to move. The question is whether the judge agrees.
And the evidence against them—is it strong?
The medical examiner found twenty-three injuries on a four-year-old's body. That's not ambiguous. The defense claims accident, but that forensic picture is difficult to explain away.