The Office confirms that Madrigal has located several brothers and a ta and rejects that it is an illegal detention case, as established in the judgment
First sentence of stolen babies: Dr. Vela robbed a baby but is acquitted by prescription
The Fiscala appeal the prescription of the first case of stolen babies
The firststolen babyrecognized by Justice was not stolen. Actually,Ins Madrigalit was given in adoption on a "voluntary" basis, as she revealed at a press conference on Thursday and confirmed theFiscala de Madridafter an own investigation. "For the first time I have the puzzle of my whole life," said Madrigal, who explained how he has managed to find his biological family thanks to some DNA tests.
In 2018, Madrigal went to the popular Californian company23andMe, specialized in genetic analysis. On his website, he offers a DNA test for a price of 99 dollars that he promotes with messages such as "discover family members around the world". Madrigal sent them a kit with samples of saliva and a few weeks later, last January, he received a report that he had a second cousin inSpain. After contacting this relative, Madrigal managed to locate his siblings by his mother and a daughter. All confirmed that nothing else was delivered voluntarily to another family.
Madrigal had taken his case to court, which last year judged the director of theSan Ramn Clinic, the doctorEduardo Vela, as responsible for the delivery of Ins to a family without the authorization of the biological mother. The ruling of the Audiencia de Madrid considered proven the theft of the baby, but absolved the doctor because the crime of illegal detention had been prescribed. Both Madrigal and Fiscala filed an appeal that is still pending in the Supreme Court.
According to the Fiscala de Madrid, on May 21, Madrigal informed them that in March he had contacted those who seemed to be his brothers and his wife. DNA tests through the same US company that gave positive results: they were brothers on the mother's side. After receiving these data, the Fiscal decided to open an investigation and interrogate as witnesses three brothers located and the ta. The four recognized that they knew about the delivery of the baby, which was done without even knowing if it was a girl or a boy. They added that Ins's mother, who died in 2013, had told them that they had an older sister who had voluntarily given in adoption. There is a fourth sister of Madrigal who lives inUSAand that she has not been questioned or subjected to the tests.
Madrigal also provided the Fiscala with a Facebook message of 2015 that had gone unnoticed in his day. It was one of his brothers, who told him to get in touch with him because he was looking for a baby born in June 1969 at the San Ramn Clinic. Madrigal does not read the message, but after contacting his second cousin he reviews old messages and locates this one. On March 4, four years late, Madrigal responded to his brother's message.
In parallel to the taking of statements, the Fiscala de Madrid ordered its own genetic tests. On July 3, I received an opinion from theNational Institute of Toxicologywhich indicated that "the results in the index of kinship indicate that it is 78.802 times more probable the observed genetic compatibility if we consider that Ins Elena Madrigal Prez is the daughter of the alleged mother, rather than a person taken at random from the population and not genetically related to it. "
What has happened has generated a confusing judicial situation that should be clarified in the next weeks or months. The sentence of last October gave as proven facts that Dr. Vela "delivers to a girl of a few days without the consent of the biological parents, whose identity is unknown." The Public Prosecutor of Madrid has informed the Attorney General that it considers that this can no longer be sustained and that "the theft of a baby should be excluded as a proven fact, and with it the crime of illegal detention."
The Prosecutor of Madrid also accused Dr. Vela of the crimes – equally prescribed by the Court – of supposing childbirth and falsehood in an official document, which could have been committed even if the delivery of the baby was voluntary, since it would have been an adoption irregular. The first crime was committed when the doctor asked the mother who was going to adopt Madrigal to pretend to be pregnant. The second, by registering her in the Civil Registry as the natural daughter of the adoptive mother. The Public Ministry has informed the High Court of the new circumstances of the case, but it does not foresee the withdrawal of the appeal, which should serve to clarify how to calculate the statute of limitations in cases of stolen babies.
According to the criteria of
(tagsToTranslate) Spain (t) police and justice – magistracy (t) Inés Madrigal (t) Spain (t) Supreme Court (t) woman (t) trial (t) family (t) mother