a tactic designed to obstruct rather than defend
Em uma manhã de março no Rio de Janeiro, o julgamento de um homem acusado de matar um menino de quatro anos foi interrompido antes mesmo de começar, quando seus cinco advogados abandonaram o tribunal em manobra calculada para forçar o adiamento. O caso de Henry Borel — criança que morreu em 2021 com vinte e três lesões documentadas no corpo — transcende o destino de um réu: ele moldou a legislação brasileira de proteção à infância e continua a testar se a justiça consegue alcançar os mais vulneráveis. O adiamento para junho não é apenas uma pausa processual, mas mais um capítulo em uma longa espera que uma família e um país ainda carregam.
- Cinco advogados de defesa abandonaram coordenadamente o júri na manhã de 23 de março, sabendo que a lei brasileira impede que um réu seja julgado sem representação legal — a saída foi uma estratégia, não um protesto espontâneo.
- A juíza Elizabeth Machado Louro já havia negado o pedido de adiamento da defesa antes do abandono, e classificou a retirada como desrespeito às diretrizes do Supremo Tribunal Federal e aos princípios que protegem tanto réus quanto famílias de vítimas.
- O julgamento foi remarcado para 22 de junho, adiando mais uma vez a possibilidade de responsabilização pelo homicídio qualificado, tortura e fraude imputados a Jairinho e à mãe de Henry, Monique Medeiros.
- A morte de Henry em 2021 — causada por traumatismo contuso que resultou em hemorragia interna e laceração do fígado — gerou a Lei Henry Borel, que classificou crimes contra crianças menores de 14 anos como hediondos, transformando o caso em marco jurídico nacional.
O julgamento de Jairo Souza Santos Júnior, o Jairinho, parou antes de começar. Na manhã de 23 de março, quando o júri deveria ouvir as primeiras testemunhas pelo assassinato do pequeno Henry Borel, os cinco advogados de defesa se levantaram e saíram do tribunal. A manobra era calculada: sem representação legal, o júri não pode prosseguir. O julgamento foi adiado para 22 de junho.
A juíza Elizabeth Machado Louro já havia negado o pedido de adiamento feito pela defesa logo pela manhã, sob alegação de dificuldades no acesso às provas. Quando os advogados anunciaram o abandono, ela não aceitou a narrativa de protesto principiológico. Classificou a conduta como abandono processual, uma tática de obstrução que violava orientações do Supremo Tribunal Federal e os princípios que amparam tanto o acusado quanto as famílias das vítimas.
Henry Borel tinha quatro anos quando morreu em 8 de março de 2021, no bairro da Barra da Tijuca, no Rio de Janeiro. O laudo pericial registrou vinte e três lesões em seu corpo. A causa da morte foi hemorragia interna e laceração do fígado por traumatismo contuso. Jairinho e Monique Medeiros, mãe de Henry, respondem por homicídio qualificado, tortura e fraude.
O caso ultrapassou os limites do tribunal. A morte de Henry impulsionou a criação da Lei Henry Borel, que classificou crimes contra crianças menores de 14 anos como hediondos — uma mudança que restringiu a possibilidade de progressão de pena e reconfigurou o tratamento judicial da violência contra menores em todo o país.
Com o julgamento suspenso até junho, a defesa ganhou tempo, mas também atraiu o olhar severo da magistrada. A questão que permanece é se a estratégia mudará quando o júri finalmente se sentar — ou se as mesmas tensões que esvaziaram o tribunal nesta segunda-feira voltarão a dominar a sala.
The trial of Jairo Souza Santos Júnior, known as Jairinho, ground to a halt before it truly began. On Monday morning, March 23rd, as the jury proceedings opened in what should have been the first day of testimony in the death of four-year-old Henry Borel, Jairinho's five defense attorneys made a coordinated decision: they would leave the courtroom. The move was calculated. Under Brazilian law, a defendant cannot proceed to trial without legal representation in a jury proceeding, which meant their departure would force a postponement. The trial was rescheduled for June 22nd.
Judge Elizabeth Machado Louro had anticipated the maneuver. When Jairinho's lawyers first requested an adjournment that morning, citing problems accessing evidence, she denied it. Moments later, all five attorneys announced they were abandoning the proceedings. The judge did not accept their framing. She characterized what had just happened not as a principled legal objection but as what it appeared to be: procedural abandonment, a tactic designed to obstruct rather than defend. She noted that the conduct violated guidance from Brazil's Supreme Court and breached fundamental principles that govern jury trials—protections meant to safeguard both the accused and the families of victims.
The case itself carries weight that extends far beyond the courtroom. Henry Borel was four years old when he died on March 8, 2021, in the Barra da Tijuca neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro. The medical examiner's report documented twenty-three separate injuries on his body. The cause of death was internal bleeding and liver laceration resulting from blunt force trauma. Jairinho and Henry's mother, Monique Medeiros, both face charges of qualified homicide—homicide with aggravating circumstances—along with charges of torture and fraud in connection with the case.
The death of Henry Borel became a catalyst for legislative change. The case prompted the creation of the Henry Borel Law, which classified crimes against children under fourteen as heinous offenses, a designation that carries severe legal consequences and limits the possibility of parole. The law transformed how Brazilian courts treat violence against minors, making the trial not merely a matter of individual accountability but a test of how the justice system responds to the most vulnerable.
With the trial now postponed to mid-June, the case enters another waiting period. The defense's courtroom departure—whether viewed as obstruction or as a protest against what they claim are procedural inequities—has bought time but also drawn judicial scrutiny. Judge Louro's characterization of the conduct as disrespectful to both the Supreme Court's directives and the principles underlying jury trials suggests that when proceedings resume, the atmosphere will be considerably colder. The question now is whether the defense strategy will shift, or whether the same tensions that produced Monday's walkout will resurface when the jury is finally seated.
Notable Quotes
The conduct of the defense attorneys, though motivated by disagreement, constitutes procedural abandonment and disrespect to Supreme Court guidance— Judge Elizabeth Machado Louro
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would a defense team abandon a trial on its first day? That seems to guarantee they lose.
They're not trying to win the trial itself—not yet. By walking out, they force a postponement. It's a delay tactic, and in a case this high-profile, delay can matter. Time allows for appeals, for public attention to shift, for legal arguments to be refined.
But the judge saw through it immediately. She called it abandonment.
She did, and that's the risk they took. The judge made clear she views this as obstruction, not legitimate legal maneuvering. That creates a hostile environment for when the trial actually happens in June.
What about the child? Henry Borel—his body had twenty-three injuries.
Yes. The medical evidence is stark. That's why the judge emphasized that the defense's conduct disrespects not just the court but the victim's family. The law created after his death—making crimes against children heinous—that's now the framework the trial operates within.
So the defense is fighting an uphill battle no matter what.
They are. The evidence is documented. The law has changed because of this case. The judge has already signaled she views their tactics as contemptuous. What they're really doing now is buying time and testing whether they can wear down the prosecution or find some procedural opening.
And the mother, Monique Medeiros—she faces the same charges?
She does. Qualified homicide, torture, fraud. Both defendants are implicated in the same death. The trial will examine what happened in that home and who bears responsibility.