All language subtitles for Rosa.Perals.Tapes.2023.SPANISH.WEBRip.NF.en

Hi. This is Rosa.

And, as you know, I'm calling from prison.

I hope that, by doing this,
people will see who I really am,

not the person
the media has made me out to be.

Of course, it won't be easy

to explain myself and let myself be known.

Everything I've been through,
for instance...

All of this... I don't know what to call it.

This lynching of me they did
before, during, and after the trial.

And which continues today,
six years later.

If this were happening
to a man instead of a woman,

they wouldn't be thinking about
whether he had any sort of relationship.

And maybe they would try to find
the evidence they should be looking for.

They should be looking
for evidence about what happened to Pedro

and how it happened.

THIS IS THE FIRST INTERVIEW
ROSA PERAL HAS GRANTED

SINCE BEING SENTENCED
TO 25 YEARS IN PRISON

Hey!

Let's go!

- Hi!
- Say hi. You're all on camera!

- Hi!
- Hi!

THIS FOOTAGE WAS RECORDED
BY PEDRO RODRÍGUEZ

TWO MONTHS BEFORE HIS MURDER

I remember that we went skiing that year.

We went with Pedro.

And I remember
my younger daughter clinging to me.

Well done, honey.

Saying, "I'll go with Mommy."

And my older daughter said,
"I'll go with Pedro."

And I thought, "Wow.
This is what I've been looking for."

Hi!

Gorgeous.

ROSA PERAL'S TAPES

Now to the crime
involving the Urban Police.

The jury has reached its verdict.

They've found defendants
Rosa Peral and Albert López

guilty of premeditated murder.

It all started in 2017,

when Rosa and Albert,
both officers and lovers,

plotted to kill Pedro Rodríguez,

a police officer
and Rosa's romantic partner at the time.

The events were set in motion

when the victim found out
about the infidelity

and became an obstacle.

That's when Rosa and Albert
devised a plan to take his life.

The verdict says
the two drugged and murdered Rodríguez,

before placing his body
in the trunk of a car

that they set fire to
near the Foix reservoir.

The two members of the Urban Police

arrested for the murder
of a fellow officer...

...accuse each other.

They admit to taking part in the crime,
but only as accessories.

There are three theories here.

The one put forth by Rosa's defense,
in which Albert was the perpetrator.

The one put forth by Albert's defense,
which has Rosa as the perpetrator.

And the one put forth by the prosecutors,
which is that they were co-perpetrators.

Rosa's story falls apart

once you look at her actions
in the days following the crime.

She claims she was so afraid of Albert,
she couldn't go to the police.

But she was an officer.

Rosa Peral may not be a saint,

but I can assure you,
she's not a murderer.

For her, the flirting, the conquests,

and having someone was
a kind of constant cycle.

She was always seducing someone.

Pedro wanted to end that relationship,

but Rosa Peral refused to accept it
and planned to kill him.

I don't know if she did it.

I'm just a journalist.

But what I do know is that Rosa Peral
did not get a fair trial.

Do you swear by
everything you just said to me?

Or do you want to confess

that this crime was
a diabolical and perverse proof of love

that would unite you and Albert forever?

I did not plan anything with Albert.
I did not kill Pedro.

And I absolutely stand by
everything I've said.

MAY 2, 2017

DAY AFTER THE MURDER

One of the things that troubled me
from the beginning,

and which I kept going over,

was how it all happened.

It seemed unfair to me
that since the perpetrators

had burned the body and erased
any evidence of the manner of death,

they would benefit and be indicted
for homicide rather than murder.

Since I can't prove how they killed him...

PROSECUTOR FOR THE STATE

...I can't prove it was done
with malice, which would make it murder.

And this, as a prosecutor, tormented me.

They thought homicide
carried too light a sentence,

given the seriousness of the crime.

They needed it to be considered murder
to give them a harsher sentence.

ROSA'S LAWYER

So they tried to put together
a case that would constitute murder,

seeking out evidence that wasn't evidence,

but rather was conjecture
and mere suspicion.

There are no fingerprints.
We don't have a murder weapon.

The victim's body
doesn't provide any clues.

In light of all that, what do we do?

We broaden our perspective

and seek out secondary elements
that would allow us to reach a conclusion.

Because they're secondary,
they need to be more substantial.

I look at it like a trail of breadcrumbs
or a yellow brick road.

A path that can only take you
in one direction,

to the defendants' guilt.

On Saturday I went to the police station

and said, "I'll tell you everything I know
and put an end to this."

MAY 13TH
12 DAYS AFTER THE CRIME

My first shock came when I was talking

and they said,
"We're taking you to the cells."

I said, "This is a mistake."

"I came here to tell you what I know."

"I'm through staying quiet.
I'll tell you what I know."

"This can't be happening to me."

I was worried about my daughters.

"How do I tell them
we won't sleep together tonight?"

I don't even remember the moment
when they transferred me to prison.

After four days with no food,
no showers, no talking to anyone,

not even my daughters,
with no news from the outside world,

stuck in a dungeon for four whole days,

they took me to a kind of basement,
what they called the punishment area.

That's where they punished the women.

It wasn't the typical cell
for new inmates.

They didn't know what to do with me.
I didn't know I was all over the news.

I hadn't seen the press or watched TV.

I wanted to disconnect from everything.

Here is one of our first exclusives,
brought by our colleague, Miquel Valls,

on the black widow of the Urban Police.

They say Rosa is unfaithful,
dishonest, manipulative, and cold.

And that her boyfriend
is not her first victim.

Regardless of the presumption
of innocence,

she is a dangerous person.

The truth is that there have been
many high-profile cases in Spain.

JOURNALIST

This is one of them.

JOURNALIST

A young, good-looking,
sexually promiscuous woman,

who is also a police officer,
is accused of murdering her partner.

We love a crime of passion.

All the juicy ingredients were there
for us to dive right in.

The situation is becoming
more complicated for Rosa Peral.

While in prison,
she tried to hire a hit man

to kill her daughters' father.

Rosa poisoned her boyfriend,
Pedro, before ending his life.

She's a great manipulator.

Charming, very seductive.

During the time frame
they're looking into,

how many relationships
was she involved in?

It is believed she was involved
in three or four at the same time.

It seems that,
after her partner went missing,

she did not make an effort
to search for him.

Why did she wait 15 days to report it?

Doesn't act threatened...

She was the main suspect
from the beginning.

This points to her being the murderer.

This was a premeditated crime,
one in which she appears to be

the manipulator, the orchestrator,
and the brains of the operation.

I've heard outrageous things on TV.

I've heard things
that I can't believe people would say.

I'm surprised to hear people
talk about the right to information.

The right to what information?
What type of information would that be?

Because, before I went to trial,
people already knew me.

They knew my name, my face.

They knew about the case.
What had been told to them.

Logically, it was very difficult

to clear one's mind

before reading the evidence
and whatever else there was to read.

Very difficult.

Jury trial number 25/2019 begins

over a presumed crime
of premeditated murder

against Albert López Ferrer
and Rosa María Peral Viñuela.

This was the most high-profile trial
in years.

JOURNALIST

It wasn't just about seeing
Albert and Rosa on the dock,

but hearing what they said,
how they defended themselves.

The first day I thought, "I don't know
how I'll last six weeks on this trial."

Because... And that's how it should be.
It's a great responsibility.

That is to say,
for a prosecutor to sign an indictment

asking for 25 years in prison,

you must take it seriously.

You are "ruining" a citizen's life,
so to speak.

Jury trials always have some tension.

And you have to remember
that you have nine people,

nine citizens who are a bit frightened.

PRIVATE PROSECUTOR

Even more so in this case,
with all the media attention.

They look at you as if saying,
"What am I doing here?"

I'd like to share with you

one of the questions
Rosa frequently asks me.

"Am I being judged
for the people I've slept with

or whether or not I killed Pedro?"

I wanted to highlight
the importance of this issue,

which was a big part of this trial,

the idea of separating
the sin from the crime.

The attorney herself knew

that in any crime
with sentimental aspects,

we have to look into private lives.

So I see this
as a catchy defense slogan, but...

that's about it.

Rosa, I'd like to ask you some questions

about your relationships
with Rubén, Albert, and Pedro.

Is that all right? Let's see.

When did you start
a romantic relationship with Rubén?

In 2000.

- In 2000?
- Yes, 2000.

- When did you get married?
- In 2013.

- When were your daughters born?
- In 2010 and 2012.

And did you,
while you were still with Rubén,

start a relationship with Albert?

When... I mean, my relationship with Rubén

was actually very toxic.

I met Rubén when I was 16.

He was working at a nightclub.

I requested some songs.

He wasn't playing them,
and when I went to leave,

he came after me
to ask if we could see each other again.

So we started hanging out.

OCTOBER 24, 1999

He'd come by my high school to see me.

Sometimes he'd pick me up
because he already had a driver's license.

And he'd give me a ride home.

Or we'd meet up on the weekends
to go for a drive or go to the movies.

Back then, I was very much in love
and thought he was the love of my life.

But over time, that changed.

After we had the girls,
we drifted further apart.

Our relationship was beyond broken.

And yes, I started to work with Albert,

and go on 12-hour patrol shifts with him,

day after day,
which made us feel an affinity

and grow closer.

- Did you engage in sexual relations?
- We had an emotional connection.

Right. What does that mean?

I found in Albert
someone who listened to me.

I felt he was present.

Over time, it grew into something more,
though I didn't want it to stay that way.

But during the time it lasted, I thought,

"For now, we're friends with benefits,"

or whatever you call it.

He had his own expectations
of the relationship, which I didn't share.

He didn't want a family

and didn't want anything to do
with children.

And for me, logically,
my daughters came first.

So if he wasn't
going to accept any of that,

the relationship wasn't going anywhere.

That's when,
going on motorcycle rides and all that,

Pedro came into the picture.

He was a coworker.

We started meeting up
and going on bike rides,

and we found a connection.

Maybe there were similarities, right?

In the sense that...

For instance, people will sometimes say,

"Have you noticed
they have things in common?"

Like what happened with Pedro
on Rabassada Road.

DRIVER SWERVED TO AVOID OFFICERS

I published that article.

I went to a gas station on Rabassada Road,

which is where bikers go
to ride the curves.

They showed me footage

of a biker speeding
through a police checkpoint.

The officer was Pedro Rodríguez.

Then we can see Pedro mount his bike

and pursue the biker.

He pushed the biker off his bike

and raised his fist.

But when he was about to punch him,
he let the biker go.

Some of Pedro's colleagues said,
off the record,

that at that time, Pedro was...

Rosa had driven him crazy.

At that point, Pedro
had to decide whether to leave his wife

and leave it all to be with Rosa.

I'm sure that became an explosive cocktail

that went off on the Rabassada
as he failed to deal with those feelings.

I saw Pedro differently,

because despite what happened
that time on the Rabassada,

I didn't think of him as a violent person.

He helped me and was always considerate.

I had the trial for the revenge porn.

I said, "Look,
I just want to put it behind me."

And Pedro said, "No, get with a lawyer.
You can't leave it at that."

The revenge porn events
took place in 2008.

Twenty-three-year-old Rosa had just joined
the Ciutat Vella precinct.

A few months later,
she started a relationship

with Detective Sergeant Óscar,

behind the back
of her official partner, Rubén.

Apparently, Rosa wanted
to end the relationship with Óscar.

He got angry, didn't take it well,

and decided to send out a photo
of one of their sexual encounters.

He got into Rosa Peral's email

and sent it to all her contacts.

FEBRUARY 28, 2008, 9:42 P.M.
FROM: ROSA

TO: ALL CONTACTS
SUBJECT: SEE ATTACHED FILE

HI, IT'S ROSA.
SINCE I LEFT SCHOOL,

I'VE MISSED SUCKING COPS' DICKS,

SO NOW THAT I'M IN THE FORCE,
I'VE SUCKED OFF A CORPORAL

AND A COUPLE OFFICERS.

I FUCK WITH NO CONDOM.
MORE PLEASURE FOR ALL.

CALL ME AT...

Everyone in the higher ranks backed him.

They believed
that Rosa herself had sent that email.

When I filed a complaint
over the revenge porn,

I immediately got calls
from the Urban Police.

Even high-ranking officers called, saying,

"Withdraw it. You'll ruin his life."

"I'll ruin his life?
And when he sent that photo?"

"That's nothing," they said.
"It's in the past."

"But the photo's still circulating."

CITY OF JUSTICE

That trial resumed
when Rosa Peral was in custody,

having been arrested for Pedro's murder.

At that trial,
she was no longer seen as a victim,

but as a woman accused of murder.

So her credibility had really diminished.

The inquiry wasn't done well.

More evidence could have been found

because she recorded the defendant
admitting what he had done.

You're asking me
to withdraw the complaint.

But you're still not telling me
where it came from.

- Okay, Rosa. I sent that email.
- You sent it?

Yes. I sent that email.

In the end, the trial went nowhere.

The detective sergeant was acquitted
because it couldn't be proven

that he was the one
who sent the explicit photo.

Is Rosa Peral capable
of sending that photo to all her contacts?

I don't know.
But she was capable of killing Pedro.

MAY 1, 2017
9:37 P.M.

When you got back home,

what did you do?

When we got back, I put the girls to bed,

and we went downstairs to pick up clothes,
clothes we had to wash.

MAY 16, 2017
FIRST DEPOSITION

We also had clothes to fold.

And what else happened? What did you do?

Albert kept texting me,
saying he wanted to come over and talk.

So, Albert arrived
when he was still texting me.

JUNE 20, 2017
CRIME REENACTMENT

At that point, I opened this door.

When I went out,
I saw him jumping over the fence.

He came towards me.

He had a neck gaiter, gloves,
and a backpack with a stick sticking out.

It's strange,
seeing someone approach with an ax,

lift his shirt, and show me his gun.

He didn't take his gun out
and put it to my head,

but he still had a gun.

And that had the same effect on me
as if he had put it to my head.

He said, "Give me your cell phone.
Give it to me."

I gave it to him,
throwing it on the ground,

and ran upstairs.

When I went up,

I locked the door behind me
and started hearing lots of blows.

Rosa, were the blows you heard like these?

Not so loud.

Not so loud.

I went to check on the girls,

to make sure they hadn't been awakened
by the fence, the doors, all the noises.

When I saw they were still asleep,
I came into the dining room and sat down.

I got nervous
and went into the kitchen for some water.

I kept pacing back and forth.

That's when I thought,
"How do I keep him from coming for me?"

"I can't escape. What do I do?"

"Jump out the window
with a 4 and a 6-year-old?"

Right. So when did you unlock the door?

When he told me to go down
or he'd come up for me.

I went downstairs.

He told me to clean up,
and I asked, "Clean what?"

He said, "Here."

I said, "Here?
What's this? Water, bleach?"

"What do I clean with water and bleach?"

I started cleaning
and looked around to see where Pedro was,

trying to see what had happened,
what those noises were.

But I saw nothing.

No stains, no Pedro, nothing.

She claimed to be terrified of Albert.

That's why she did not react.
Or didn't know how to react.

She said,
"If I hadn't been a police officer,

no one would have been shocked
by the way I acted."

But you were a police officer.

All she had to do was call a friend
and say, "This happened."

And they would have come
to her rescue or aid.

That wasn't the case here.

The theory that she was afraid
didn't line up with the behavior

she exhibited for several days
following the murder.

Rosa didn't live
in close proximity with Albert.

It was hard for me...

I mean, I found it very difficult

to justify her behavior of
not reporting Albert after several days.

Having a security detail in her house,
being able to talk to other people,

not once did she say a word
about all this.

It's hard to believe because the cause
of that fear should still be there.

You'd have to have been
in a similar situation.

If not, it's probably hard to understand.

A person who's experienced
that kind of fear.

Having someone threaten you, tell you...

Where you feel coerced.

Of course your reaction
may not be rational.

In hindsight, I made the wrong decision.

And that led people to not believe me.

Or doubt me and say,
"Why did she act like that?"

"Why didn't she confront him,
stand up to him?"

"Why didn't she go to the police?
Why didn't she trust them?"

I have a history,
so to speak, with the police,

which, over the years,
has led me to mistrust them.

Like what happened with the revenge porn.

That experience made me think,

"Can I really trust these people
with this,

when they failed to help me
at less important moments?"

How beautiful my little girl
How beautiful in her slumber

Like a poppy among the green wheat fields

How beautiful my little girl

How beautiful in her slumber

Like a poppy

Among the green wheat fields

APRIL 23, 2023
ROSA PERAL'S HOUSE

It's been almost six years
since Rosa was sent to prison. Six years.

She hasn't lost her mind.
She's still herself.

She maintains her innocence.
She stands by it.

She's lucky to have
her father supporting her.

ROSA'S FATHER

I take her girls to see her every month.

That's a lifeline for her.

My father helps me every way he can,
and I try not to be too annoying.

Obviously, it's unavoidable sometimes
because that's just how it goes.

It's been six years.

And he helps me.
Most of all, with my daughters.

My mother did too.

I don't mention her
because she's no longer with us.

But if it weren't for them,
I'd never see my daughters.

It's complicated.

It's complicated every time they come.

I have to assume I'm an outsider
and use that time

to try and make sure that they have fun.

My goal is for them
to always leave wanting to come back.

I'm always afraid they may not want to.

Maybe the hostile environment here
will put them off.

They are little girls coming into a prison
and being told, "Take off your watch."

"Take this off."

There might be a day when one brings
a piece of candy because she's had one

and says, "I want to give one to Mommy

because I want her to try one."

They say, "I had a great one,
so I'll bring you one of those."

And then she brings it, and they say,
"No, you have to throw it in the garbage."

FEBRUARY 4, 2020
WITNESS STATEMENTS BEGIN

It's the first day of witness testimony.

The court plans to hear from

more than 50 witnesses
over the coming weeks.

Many witnesses in this trial
speak of Rosa as a woman

with many complicated relationships
with different men.

The idea is she suffers from,

and I don't know
if this is the right term,

from an anti-monogamous pathology.

She cannot be with just one person.

However, it isn't clear
if her behavior is sexually promiscuous.

Which would, of course,
be within her rights.

Rosa grabbed people's attention.

Some journalists
even confessed as much to me.

Because the story
of two men in a fight wouldn't sell

and wasn't original.

But the story of a black widow

was much more marketable
and would draw a larger audience.

And there were new lovers
popping up almost every week.

Her actual lovers and those later
attributed to her to fuel the narrative.

Because that played into it as well.

It's not that the press
wanted to reveal her love affairs.

It's that the people involved in the crime
had romantic relationships with her.

I respect and appreciate my colleagues,
but in this case,

they did not act impartially and fairly.

I'm guilty of it myself.

I remember, when they arrested her
and all that, I published an article.

I reread it recently and was ashamed.

"Rosa Peral, this stripper..."
Never once did she work as a stripper.

She was never a dancer at a club,

or went topless,
or did any of those things they wrote.

They created this character
because there's no evidence against me.

All the evidence is against him.

So the only way
to accuse me, to say that I colluded,

was to portray me as a black widow.

And they even built
on that character during the trial.

For example, they asked each witness
if they had been with me,

both men and women.

Did you have any sort
of intimate relationship with Rosa?

No.

You only had one sexual encounter
with Rosa?

Yes, only one.

Did you know if Rosa
was married to someone else at the time?

- No.
- Did you have an intimate relationship?

Intimate in what sense?

- Were you in love or attracted to her?
- No.

No. At that time, was Rosa involved
in another romantic relationship?

No.

Did you know that Rosa later began
a relationship with Pedro?

Yes.

Did you know Rosa's relationship status?

Who she was with? Who her partner was?

At that time, it was Pedro.

Was Tania romantically involved with Rosa?

This line of questioning gave her
the reputation of a femme fatale.

Of a sexual, kinky woman.

And this created
a climate in the courtroom

that was clearly advantageous to one side.

- Manuel, I have to ask.
- Okay.

Is it true that you
and Rosa saw one another frequently?

- What do you mean?
- That you had frequent sexual encounters.

No, just the one time.

The court shouldn't have allowed
these things to come up.

Whether she was intimate
with one person or another.

It shouldn't have been allowed.

When the forces of law and order
tap a suspect's phone,

everything the police records

that is outside
the scope of the investigation

should not be made explicit
and should be left off the record.

Excuse me, Isaam,
but I have to ask you this.

Did you have a romantic interest in Rosa?

- None. I...
- Was Rosa interested in you?

- No, I didn't think so.
- All right.

Not at that time or ever.

Could they have told the same story

without delving into her romantic history?

Because the love triangle,
with all its satellites, was what it was.

Let's be clear.
As the representative of the prosecution,

I couldn't care less about
what someone does in their private life.

But if there are elements
within that private life

that allow us to understand

the psychology
that leads someone to commit murder

and reveal the motives behind that murder,
then I'm interested.

Not to judge them, put them on trial,
or teach them a lesson.

But to present the evidence of a murder.

Saying, "We were just laying out the facts

about Rosa's personality
that would explain the crime..."

CRIMINAL LAWYER

...is what reinforces the link
between her sins and the crime.

To say that someone
has killed another person,

you don't need
to show me their personality.

Show me proof that they killed.

This trial can only make sense
by explaining in great detail,

the way it was done during the trial
and the way the Mossos did it

in their statements,

Rosa's emotional trajectory

and how she understands
her personal and romantic relationships.

Otherwise, there's no case.

MAY 1, 2017
DAY OF THE CRIME

On May 1st, Rosa and Pedro went
on a family outing to a house Pedro owned.

They went with Rosa's parents
and her daughters.

First, they went to Calafell
to ride some slides.

They made me go down once.

I thought I was a little too old for that.

But in the end,
they made me ride with the girls.

They went down two or three times.

Pedro, with one girl.
Rosa, with the other.

After we had lunch there,
we went to Pedro's house.

They spent the afternoon at Pedro's house.

Rosa's father and Pedro worked
in the garden.

I told my father and mother,

"We're going there to clean. Wanna help?"

They always said yes to everything.

They've always lent us a hand.
They've always helped us out.

My mother had back problems.

She wasn't feeling well, so she said,
"We'll go and have lunch somewhere."

"I'll watch the girls
while the three of you clean up."

We worked very hard,
straightening up half the yard

before taking out all the trash.

We worked probably until 8:00 p.m.

It was a perfect family outing.
One in which Rosa Peral took many photos.

More than she'd ever taken.

From our perspective,

even if it sounds harsh
to put it like this,

many of those photos were taken
by Rosa to establish an alibi.

That's our theory.

During the investigation,
I realized we didn't have hard evidence,

which is what made this trial so complex.

The evidence was all circumstantial.

My colleagues and I concluded

that we would have to prove
it was part of a plan.

Why? Because if you can prove
planning went into it,

then it no longer matters
who committed the act.

JANUARY 12, 2017
3 MONTHS BEFORE THE CRIME

To understand how it all played out
and why Pedro's murder took place,

we need to go back to January 2017.

That's when Albert López
went to Rosa Peral's house

because he still believed he had
a romantic relationship with her.

And he discovered
that she was living with Pedro Rodríguez.

Is it true that around January 12, 2017,
Albert discovered

that you and Pedro were involved,

and that led to a confrontation
between you and Albert?

On that day, they didn't have a fight,

because I asked Pedro to stay inside
and stay out of the argument.

I made a scene, but just with her.
Because of what I saw when I got there.

The whole thing never escalated
beyond a few insults.

Basically, I told her to eff off,

excuse my French,
got on my motorcycle, and left.

January 29, 2017 - From: Albert
To: Rosa

You have no idea
what you're putting me through, you slut!

I hate you!

I loved you and was gonna give up
everything for you and the girls.

Now I've cried
over the worst betrayal of my life.

Don't ever talk to me again!

Everyone at the precinct knows
what you and that pig did.

I'm not ashamed
because I'm worth more than you both.

You disgust me.

I'm writing in tears of helplessness,
but I'll never forgive you.

If I ever quit the force
and no longer care about my life,

mark my words, you'll hear from me.

Don't you dare reply, you whore!

These emails are preceded by 77 emails

from this lady
asking me to get back together.

Saying it wasn't what it looked like.

But what I saw was clearly evident.

After the time he showed up
at my place, yelling and insulting me,

and things almost got physical,

I started fearing him.

You say you're afraid of him,

but I'd like to show you
the following email.

The email from Pedro
was sent at 10:00 p.m.

Four minutes later,
after Albert, whom you fear,

has threatened your partner's life,
you say to him,

"He hasn't had me, and he never will."

24 minutes later, "Only you have had me.
I want you to keep having me."

What's surprising, though I think
it's consistent with the psychology...

The psychology of the defendants
is key to us.

...is that Rosa consistently denied
there was something going on with Pedro.

I was afraid to tell him
I was seeing Pedro.

I thought he would confront Pedro
and start something.

So I figured,
over time, I'd be able to tell him.

That he'd come to his senses
and get over his obsession with me.

You bought time by saying,
"I want you to keep having me"?

Was this your plan with Albert?

- Is that what you're saying?
- It was my way of doing it then. Poorly.

The court doesn't consider,
and generally judges negatively consider,

common behaviors
for women in relationships.

Which survival strategies
are often used by women in relationships?

Avoidance.

The prosecutor's office asks,

"Why didn't you tell Albert
you were with Pedro?"

"Were you already concocting
an evil plan?"

"No. I didn't want any problems."

"I didn't want to have to explain myself
to Albert. Period."

This is never taken at face value.

This conflict-avoidance strategy

so many women in controlling relationships
use to cope with life,

was being questioned
in this interrogation.

JANUARY 30, 2017

MARCH 27, 2017

ALBERT LÓPEZ
HEY. SINCE YOU'RE AT THE PRECINCT TODAY,

EVERYBODY'S WAITING TO SEE
WHEN WE RUN INTO EACH OTHER.

TYPICAL GOSSIPS,
TRYING TO STIR UP MORE SHIT ABOUT YOU.

In late March,

Albert attempts to resume contact
with Rosa through Facebook,

but using a totally different tone.

HOW ABOUT WHEN WE BUMP INTO EACH OTHER,
WE PRETEND LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED?

GOT IT. YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED.

WHY WON'T YOU UNBLOCK ME ON WHATSAPP?
IS THE COUCH POTATO REALLY THAT JEALOUS?

DON'T BE LIKE THAT, DUMMY.
YOU KNOW I HAVE A HEART OF GOLD.

I WON'T GIVE YOU ANY MORE TROUBLE.

TRUST ME. I NEVER LIED TO YOU.

At that point,
the messages were not threatening.

They weren't rancorous.

They did not rise to the level
they had previously, back in January.

I got the impression
that the tone was friendlier.

We cannot assess

whether at that time Rosa wanted to resume
her romantic or sexual relationship

with Albert or not.

What we did see
was a change in her behavior,

starting in April,
when she was given the ring.

That's when we noticed a big change
in both of them.

Let's go back to April 8th.

The day of the ring.

Did you plan to meet up with him
when you were with your friends?

I figured it would be best not to meet
to avoid misunderstandings.

And not repeat what had happened before,
so that things would be clearer.

That day I told him, "Look,
I'm not going to make plans with you."

"But I'm with my friends right now."

"Not alone, where you might misunderstand
what I'm trying to say."

"If you want to stop by and say hello
because you're working, that's fine."

That's when he,
dressed in his uniform, comes by

and throws the ring at her, saying,
"In case you want to think it over."

I wanted us to work together again.

Because I'd told her a few times

in those conversations you mentioned,
and she was undecided.

So I thought,
"Maybe this will convince her."

- A ring, so she'd work with you again.
- That's right.

If it led to something else,
I wouldn't say no.

That ring was a symbol.

It meant, "I'm willing to do anything."

"This time is different."

"I'm doing it in front of your friends."

"This time, it's a ring,
the ultimate symbol of commitment."

"A commitment
that implies family, children."

And she was playing around
with both rings.

One of the most shocking moments
of the trial

was when a friend of hers testified
that when they met for coffee,

Rosa had a ring on each hand.

One from Pedro and one from Albert.

Does she ever make a decision?

Like, "I'll say yes and leave Pedro."

"I'll return the ring to Albert."

No. Not at that time.

She doesn't decide and say,

"I think Pedro's better,"
or anything like that?

In the end, she did choose Pedro.

Tell us. What did she say?

What words did she use when she said,
"I choose Pedro"?

Word for word?

As best you can.

"He dresses and fucks better."

- Say that again?
- "He dresses and fucks better."

No, that's not true.

What's true is that they kept asking,
"What are you gonna do?"

Sure, that question came up.

So I said, "Stay with Pedro."

From the beginning,
there was no doubt about it.

For a very long time.

And if it isn't Pedro,
then I'll be alone, but not with him.

So she thinks it's funny
to make a joke at the trial.

Because since they are talking
about sex and talking

about what I like and...

There was no question. No.

My decision was clear.

First, because he accepted my daughters.

And he put effort into the relationship
and into getting to know me,

into getting to know them.

And he made nice gestures
towards my girls.

He'd say,
"I don't want to take Rubén's place."

"I'll just be your partner,

but I want to be someone special to them."

He'd tell me, "I won't be their uncle
because they already have uncles."

"So I'll be their Titi."

"I want them to know I'm someone special
who'll be there to teach them,

help them, and be there for them
whenever they need."

Pedro began to awaken
a part of me that had fallen asleep.

That feminine part of me.
Wait. The call's about to drop.

New evidence doesn't normally appear

before the trial or during it.

But, in this case,
something curious happened.

Evidence was presented in court

consisting of all the material recovered
from Rosa Peral's cell phone.

Many files. Thousands and thousands.

And they found
a conversation from April 19th.

A voice message
Rosa Peral sent to Albert López...

...where she addresses him
with the pet name she had for him.

This message,
heard objectively, is chilling.

Hey, dummy. Your cell phone is off.

Okay, well, I went to Caprabo

and got a discount for PortAventura.

I was thinking that if we do that,

we could go to PortAventura
the following weekend

and stay the night with the girls.

What do you think?

Rosa, tell me about this voice message.

It has nothing to do with Albert.

I don't know why,
but they say it's linked to him.

I use many such words to avoid using
foul language in front of my daughters.

I say "dummy,"
"dumbo," "silly," and many other things.

Rosa, we have thousands of pages.
Thousands.

And I ask, can you point to one,

just one conversation or email,

where you call someone
other than Albert "dummy"?

I'm telling you, I say it verbally.

When I speak,
I say it so my girls don't hear.

On both their phones,
there are thousands of phone conversations

and hundreds of WhatsApp messages
and emails.

If you can prove to me
that she calls somebody else "dummy,"

maybe I'll think the message is
for someone else.

It can't be proven.

The experts explained,

and they can show us
the CD of how they did it,

two or three things
about this audio recording.

One is that your phone's GPS
on April 19, 2017, puts you at Caprabo.

And you start by saying,
"I went to Caprabo."

Two, that you, at 3:24 p.m.,
right before, tried to call Albert twice.

Not Manuel. Albert.

And immediately after this voice message,
the first person you talk to is Albert.

This audio recording
was in Rosa's cell phone,

but it wasn't part of any conversation.

That is to say,
it was a loose audio file in the device.

It did not have
what the experts call "metadata,"

data that could give us the date,
time, place, and all the information.

All it had was the date
when the file was last modified.

The defense said

that message could be
from three years before.

But it just so happened
that on April 19th,

at the time of the message,

she was geolocated
right by a Caprabo supermarket.

Do you often go to Caprabo?

I wouldn't say every day, but often.

There's one near my daughters' school.

I shop there on my way to the school
or on my way back.

The defense lawyers are aware
that this audio recording

on its own has no value,

but seen in context,
within the strategy of the prosecutions,

it is of great value.

So very logically, and as they should,

they tried to prove
that it was not recorded that day.

And to wrap up this topic,
what do you mean by "if we do that"?

I'm not sure what it was.

With all the plans we had with Manu,

it was probably an outing
we planned on our motorcycles.

What is "that"?

For the prosecutions, it was clear.
"That" was killing Pedro.

This has a lot of value.

Why is it valuable?

I debated this endlessly
with my colleagues.

I analyzed every word.

It has great value
because she says, "we do."

The first-person plural.

But if you killed Pedro,

would you go to PortAventura
the following weekend?

You'd have to put on an act, right?

Would you go to PortAventura
with your lover and accomplice?

It seems completely illogical, right?

You'd have to be a real psychopath.

And none of Rosa's psych reports
showed those tendencies.

That would have been the epitome of cold.

But we don't know what "that" is.
"That" could be anything.

It could be a barbecue.

I watched the trial every day.

I was there.

And honestly, all the things
being said by the prosecutor,

nothing makes sense or has substance.

Nothing points to her as guilty.
Nothing lets him say, "There is this."

Because we thought, at least I did,

that they'd never get this far.

Because my wife wasn't well.

She was already in decline.

All this hurt her very much,
seeing that I couldn't get out,

seeing these restrictions,
everything that's happened to me,

everything that's been said.

FEBRUARY 3, 2020
FIRST DAY OF THE TRIAL

All my wife kept saying was, "But why?"

"Why's she in prison? She did nothing."

"Why is she locked up?"

And, of course, how could I explain it

when she didn't have
her faculties anymore?

No matter how much I explain
and tell her about it...

I must say it's all very hard. Really.

I called in the morning
and asked, "How is she?"

He said, "Her vitals aren't great."

And I said,
"She's been holding on for a week."

"She survived the surgery.
Don't worry. She'll get through it."

You know? I mean,
after all she's endured, how can she not...

And my father said to me, "Not anymore."

I called and called
to see if she got better.

And he asked me to wait,
that she might still...

Well, all that.

And she didn't.

I did not imagine
anything like that, you know?

Something so sudden

with me so far away,

when I had always been close to her.

Look!

I still can't get my head around it,
honestly.

I still can't because I'm here,

and I'm not at home
to see that she's not there.

Let's move on, Rosa.

Allow me to recap.

We had the ring thing on April 8th,
the voice message on April 19th.

On to the following day.

One day after that recording
from April 19th.

Albert's purchase of a Lyca phone.

You know which phone I mean, right?

- I do.
- Good.

That phone was bought
by Albert López on April 20th.

That's the day after

he got a message from Rosa telling him,

"Let's go to PortAventura
with our daughters."

And a few days after, he gave Rosa a ring.

So it would seem that on April 20th,

they knew they'd set in motion
their criminal plan to end Pedro's life.

APRIL 2017

MONDAY 27, FACEBOOK MESSAGE
SATURDAY 8, RING

This phone is more significant
than it would appear.

Obviously, the phone isn't very relevant
without context.

This phone is important

because it's only used on two significant
and very important occasions.

First, he bought this phone on April 20th.

Then, just after, or a few hours later,

Albert goes to an area
within the vicinity of Rosa's home.

That very same day,
Rosa makes a missed call to that number.

But this phone was not actually activated
until the night of May 1st.

And then, on the night of May 2nd,
it was used to place two missed calls.

They had clearly rekindled
their relationship.

And there were
some events and circumstances

indicating they were plotting something.

When the investigators
looked into the crime,

once they suspected Rosa and Albert,

they found a frenzy of phone calls
happening between them.

Phones tell us a lot.

Starting with the number of calls,

their duration, and the fluctuations
in communication between people.

But in addition,
telephones tell us where people are.

Where the caller and the receiver
are at any given time.

Therefore, we could place
Rosa and Albert together

in areas consistent with Rosa's address

on several occasions
when Pedro was not there.

I just dropped off the girls,
and I'm heading home.

Fingers crossed the guy leaves soon.
I'll let you know.

When I get home,
I'll start on the laundry and the dishes.

And once he leaves, I'll let you know.

What's odd about the 25th
is not just the fact that they met up,

but also the voice messages
that she sent him.

What's striking about those messages is
the contempt that she shows towards Pedro.

I'll just ignore him a little
so he'll leave sooner.

Let me ask you,

does that seem like an appropriate way

to talk about your partner?

And does that seem
like an appropriate conversation to have

with someone you are inviting over,
someone you want nothing to do with?

It didn't seem inappropriate to me
to try to move things along.

I still had the ring from April 8th

because I hadn't had
a chance to return it.

And saying, "the guy"
and "I'll just ignore him a little"?

Is that an appropriate way
to speak about your partner?

As I said,
I was trying to move things along.

You mean, get Pedro out quickly?

I wanted to move things along
so I could return the ring.

I had no other opportunity
to meet Albert and give him the ring.

APRIL 25

APRIL 15

ROSA - 5:22 P.M.
I WAS SO HAPPY.

HE GAVE ME ALL I WANTED, CAME TO CUBELLAS,

AND WANTED TO GET MARRIED...

ROSA - 5:22 P.M.
BUT NOW WE ARGUE EVERY DAY

JUDIT. 5:27 P.M.
SHIT.

These messages indicate you
and Pedro weren't getting along so well.

You say, "We argue every day."

That day I had an argument or a...

I'm not sure
if "argument" is even the right word.

We'd both been in previous relationships
and had children with other partners...

Let me interrupt.

- Did you argue every day or not?
- No.

- So were you lying to your friend Judit?
- I wasn't lying.

It's possible I was exaggerating
because I was angry.

There were a lot of ups and downs.

One or two days before the murder,

Pedro might have said
how much he loved Rosa.

But four days earlier,
they might have had a serious argument.

That's how it was.

Allow me to continue.

"Albert wasn't that nice
to all women," you said.

"I had fallen head over heels for Albert."

Your friend said,

"Things went south between you two,
and now you've gone your separate ways."

And you responded,
and pay attention to your response,

"You never know."

"If he changed his attitude
and gave me what I wanted,

and I wasn't with this other guy..."

- You said that.
- Yes.

And you then said, "Impossible things
are just a bit more difficult."

That doesn't mean
I wanted to kill him or leave him.

I've broken up many times
with my partners.

It didn't mean...

In a relationship,
you can have lots of arguments.

There can be times when you're not...

Anyone tells me
they never argue with their partner

or that they've never said,

"Today I'd leave home.
I'm gonna take a walk and be back later."

Whoever claims that is lying.

APRIL 15, 2017
JUDIT'S WHATSAPP MESSAGE

Our thinking is that, after April 8th,
they started thinking about

what getting back together would entail.

We believe that.

We also believe
Rosa showed Albert, in some way,

that Pedro would get in the way of
their reunion.

That's what we believe.

And they called each other
some 50 times before the end of April.

Completed calls. This is important.

ROSA - ALBERT (APRIL 2017)

TUESDAY 4
ROSA: 2 CALLS, ALBERT: 2 CALLS

SATURDAY 8
ROSA: 2 CALLS, ALBERT: 6 CALLS

THURSDAY 20
ROSA: 3 CALLS, ALBERT: 3 CALLS

This isn't entirely true.

Although there were 50 calls,
only 31 of them were completed.

The others were missed calls,
where they didn't speak.

But if the prosecutions
want to say the planning took place

between the time Albert
gave her the ring on April 8th

and the voice message on April 19th,

then I can tell you
there are only four calls in that period,

amounting to a total of 30 minutes.

Not even. Twenty-eight minutes.

So they would have had to plan a murder
in those 28 minutes.

Look, I think...

The fact that there were four calls

may mean they said, "I'm gonna do it,"
but not, "Here's how I'll do it."

Is that clear?

What matters here
is that they decided to do it.

They could have decided how to go about it

in one or two calls
or when they met on the 25th.

Or maybe they met
in person without their phones.

We'll never know.

They also could've communicated
over Telegram,

where the messages
aren't accessible to us.

So, the fact that they did not talk again

could be explained that way.

The truth is
that we can't make assumptions here.

We need to have evidence.

Therefore, we can't accept theories

about them communicating
via Telegram or by smoke signals

or by any other means.

Or whether they saw each other
on more or fewer occasions.

What counts is the evidence we have,
not the evidence we don't have.

The last night I spent with Pedro...

APRIL 30, 2017
DAY BEFORE THE CRIME

...was very special to me.

It was difficult for me
whenever the girls were with their father.

So Pedro decided to try and cheer me up.

We went out to dinner.
We took a stroll on the beach.

It doesn't make sense when they talk
about the crime being premeditated.

All those things the prosecutor made up,
that we had planned it,

it makes no sense.

The night before it happened,

I was walking on the beach
and having dinner,

disconnected from the rest of the world.

What happened to me the following day
just doesn't make any sense.

MAY 1, 2017
9:37 P.M.

We found out that at 9:37 p.m.,
they arrived home.

How? Thanks to their phones.

Going forward, it's extremely important

to pay close attention
to each minute that follows,

because the timing is crucial.

At 9:51 p.m., you called Albert.

- It was a missed call.
- Yes.

Albert didn't answer.

- Yes.
- Why'd you call?

I had a ton of messages
from Albert, and I couldn't read them all.

It was easier to call
and say, "Stop texting me."

At 9:53 p.m., she calls Albert again.
Only this time, the call goes through.

That is to say, Albert answers,
and they talk for four minutes.

I wish we knew what they talked about.

It would definitely tell us
what happened that night.

We said 9:53 p.m.

And ten minutes later...
Actually, 11 minutes later,

Albert activated his Lyca phone
for the first time.

He called you, but you didn't answer.

The police and the prosecutor
have always contended

that this is the call
that set the plan in motion.

The jury took for granted the premise

that Rosa and Pedro took advantage

of the fact that Pedro was asleep
or resting to kill him.

Pedro was a big, strong guy.

He would not be easy to knock down.

I believe Rosa
didn't leave anything up to chance.

She gave him something to subdue him.
To make him drowsy or knock him out.

In any case, Pedro was left unable
to react and defend himself

when Albert arrived.

And I believe Albert is the person
who actively participated in the murder.

They arrived at this conclusion
based on the testimony of Antonia.

She's the partner
of Rosa's ex-husband, Rubén.

Is it true that Rubén's partner,
Antonia, is listed in your address book

as "Antonia Bitch"?

Yes. We had a terrible relationship.

Antonia claimed that Rosa's older daughter

made a series of statements

that supported that Rosa
played an active role in the crime.

Since Rosa's eldest daughter was a minor,

she was assigned a public defender
during the preliminary investigation.

The defender decided that,

because the girl had the right
not to testify against her mother,

she could exercise that right.

There's another thing I'd like to clarify.

It's been said
on TV shows and in many places,

and there's been some confusion.

Many people say,
"Even her daughters said they saw her."

Or, "Her daughters said..."

No. My daughters haven't said anything
because they didn't see anything.

And I want to make that very clear.

Make no mistake. My daughters saw nothing.

My ex's partner, Antonia,
was the one who testified.

When? How?

Also, say it word for word.
Do not give us your interpretation.

I want the minor's exact words

when she told you
about the incident she witnessed.

- Just a moment.
- Look...

No, hold on.

Right then,
the judge stopped the proceedings.

Because if it had been decided
that the girl did not have to testify,

then she did not have to testify directly
or indirectly through another person

in whom the girl
might have innocently confided.

Because it was a way of circumventing
her choice not to testify.

It's inadmissible for a hearsay witness

to testify in place of a minor
who has exercised her right not to.

I'm sorry.

So I asked the court to allow Antonia

to describe how the girl moved
when she was imitating Pedro.

Her mom walked Titi down the stairs.

- Your Honor, I object.
- No. You can't speak.

Do not narrate.

- Mime the actions the girl did.
- Fine.

While she was miming,

which was saying a lot,
she was also talking.

If she had only mimed, without talking,
it would have added nothing to the trial.

He was like a robot. Held from here.
He was like a robot going downstairs.

Excuse me. We can't hear you well.

You're too far from the microphone.

- Get closer...
- I'll sit down, okay?

When Antonia was allowed
to mime his behavior,

without making any commentary

or describing it verbally,

it looked like a silent film.

Although it was
a very sad and serious matter,

the situation was kind of funny.

That was an impersonation of Titi.

By Titi, you mean Pedro.

Was the girl referring
to a particular day?

To the day of the events.

- No further questions.
- Thank you. The defense may speak.

How do you know it was that day?
And what events?

Because she told me...

- This is...
- Because I know.

Because she told me so.

- Excuse me...
- That...

I must point out a contradiction
with her previous statements.

I can't allow it.

Yes. You can't allow only one part
of the account to be presented.

Members of the jury
will disregard the witness's words.

"Pay attention to her actions,
not her words."

Therefore, the jury had to consider
her gestures and ignore what they heard.

But they still heard it.

The jury did follow the judge's warning

and did not make the slightest reference
to the witness's words.

In the verdict, the jury said that Rosa
took Pedro downstairs like a robot,

and that it was proof
that Rosa had drugged him.

That is what put me behind bars.

And I say again, at no point
did my daughters say anything.

Because they saw nothing.

They can't treat Antonia's statement

as if it's the absolute truth.

She's a woman
who I've never gotten along with.

So, logically, she took the opportunity
to get back at me. Right?

But I don't know if she realized
how much she was hurting me.

And she couldn't take it back
because they would have told her,

"If you do, you'll perjure yourself
and be sent to jail."

PEDRO'S MURDER

18 HOURS LATER
MAY 2ND

Rosa's biggest mistake

was keeping Pedro's phone at her house.

PEDRO RODRÍGUEZ. 9:26 P.M.
BABE

The defendants' strategy

was to pretend Pedro was still alive.

How do they do it?

By sending messages back and forth
between Rosa and Pedro's phones.

They admitted this.

They took Pedro's cell phone
and drove his car near Rubén's house,

to place Pedro there
and make it look like Rubén killed him.

PEDRO - 9:50 P.M.
TURNING OFF PHONE, DON'T WANT IT VIBRATING

At 9:50 p.m.,
when he says he's turning off his phone,

cell phone towers place him
in the vicinity of Rubén's house.

- Is that correct?
- Yes, that's correct.

When we got to Rubén's house,
Albert told me to send those messages.

That's when I realized
that whatever Albert had done to Pedro,

whether they argued,
or Albert hit or threatened Pedro,

he wanted to make it look
like Rubén did it.

Rosa, after turning off Pedro's phone
near Rubén's house, what did you do?

After that, Albert took me to my house,
and he handed me the keys to Pedro's car.

So you drove Pedro's car,
and Albert drove his?

Yes, I followed him.

Albert drove his car,
and I followed behind with Pedro's.

You were alone and could've driven
to a police station or called someone.

You chose not to and followed him.

If I had taken off,
unless I sped away like I was in a race,

managed to get to a police station,
and been immediately believed...

- All of those hypotheticals...
- But you are a police officer.

Yes, exactly.
That's why I thought that way.

Sure, all of those thoughts
raced through my mind.

But before I would've reached the police,
he would have driven back to my house.

So you followed him.
How long did it take you to arrive?

- You went right to the reservoir?
- Yes.

He knew exactly where he was going.

He knew the destination.

He even used his turn signal.
He knew where he was headed.

I thought, "What should I do now?"

And I waited. I froze again.

Just like the day before,
I didn't know how to react.

I couldn't just take the car and leave.
I couldn't do that.

All I could do was stay there, frozen,

and watch him approach me
with two gas cans.

I can still see it vividly.

He opened the car doors
and took out two big red cans.

I said, "Wow. That looks like gasoline."

When he approached me, I thought,
"He's gonna douse me with gasoline."

"If he does, I can run all I want,
but if he lights a match, I'm done for."

So I ran for it so he couldn't splash me
with gasoline or hurt me.

I dropped things as I was running,

but I didn't stop to pick them up
or look back.

All I could think about was running away.

"If he wants to shoot me,
let him shoot me in the back."

She started going down the road

when Albert drove up
in his car and told her,

"Get in, or I'll get to your daughters
quicker than you will."

For Rosa's defense,

it was crucial that those keys
were dropped so near the road

because that placed them far from the car.

That supported Rosa's story

that she ran toward the road
and they had fallen out of her pocket,

or that they were still in her hand
when she started running.

The fact that the keys
were found near the scene of the crime

was not relevant
from the prosecution's point of view.

We believed both of them
had gone to the reservoir voluntarily.

That is supported by the fact

that they had to use two vehicles
to go to the reservoir.

Let's proceed, Rosa.

So, you got in the car,
and where did you go?

That was when he drove me home.

And told me not to say a word.

And I said,
"I won't report the car. I don't care."

"A car's a car.
It's a thing. It doesn't matter."

"Just leave me alone."

"All I want is for you to leave me alone."

In order for Rosa's version of events
to make sense,

you just need to believe
that she was paralyzed by fear.

I mean, if you believe
that Rosa was that afraid of Albert,

everything else fits.

"I'm afraid."

"I don't dare say a word the next day."

"Or two days later.
I'm in shock. I'm paralyzed."

Wouldn't you speak up
after the third, fourth,

fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth day,
when you've had time to collect yourself?

When your colleagues
are rallying around you?

When the homicide squad
knows he's involved

and they can protect you?

She's been judged
for her actions after the crime.

There's no proof
of what happened on that day.

Like I said, because she didn't cry,
because she didn't report it.

If you understand
how scared she was of Albert,

of what he might do to her,

or worse, do to her daughters,
the people she loved the most,

you can understand
her behavior in the aftermath.

Where is it written what is fear?

What is fear?

If she says she was paralyzed by fear,

who's to question,
on the basis of objective data,

whether Rosa had a right to feel that way?

Her biggest fear wasn't
what might happen to her or her parents.

She was afraid for her daughters.

In my opinion, she was protecting them.

No one ever takes that into account.

You know something?
At that point, I thought...

More than anything,
I wanted to protect my children's lives.

I wanted them out of harm's way.

Because the real danger was Albert.

I weighed the sentence
I would receive for staying silent

against the knowledge that my family
would be protected from harm.

You know?

This all led to confusion,
and everyone has their own interpretation.

And people are intrigued
because, of course...

The investigation started with me.

I was the person closest to him.
They weren't able to switch angles.

A few years have passed.

Books have been written.

Series have been shot, etcetera.

But there are still
many unanswered questions.

And everyone has
their own interpretation of what happened.

In this case, the justice system
managed to make sense of what happened

and made it very clear

who the guilty parties are
and who was the victim.

Where's the plan?

When was it hatched?

What did it consist of?

Whose idea was it?

When we have proof,

it won't matter what Rosa and Albert say.

It was premeditated.

But when we only have a suspicion
of what may have happened,

because the alternative
makes no sense, that's not enough.

We citizens interpret crime
through a narrative lens.

And fiction, in essence, explains.

It's an explanation of events.

Why the characters do what they do.

Reality, though, is different.

I'm convinced of the truth
when a person has so many answers

and remembers so many details.

And that's what made me believe Rosa.

Because if a person is really lying,

there are holes in their story
that can't be explained.

I feel that the narrative

that made Rosa out to be
that evil, bloodthirsty woman

was created based on
the questions raised by the prosecution

and the constant coverage in the media.

We probably took things a little too far

because this character
of Rosa that was created

unwillingly made you...
tempted you to fall for clichés.

I have a clear conscience, honestly.

It's true that
when there's so much media attention,

it can influence people
to a certain extent.

Everything they said about her
is just terrible.

They didn't know her at all.

Her only crime was being attractive,
with a good figure,

and sleeping with whoever she wanted.

Rosa lives in an alternate reality,

playing by different rules
than the rest of us.

PROSECUTION'S CLOSING ARGUMENTS

I see her as a person
who can't stop talking.

Like a charlatan at a fair,

peddling some miracle cure
that's nothing more than soapy water.

What I can tell you is,
if you spend a few hours with Rosa,

she can make you believe
that you're the one who killed Pedro.

That's who Ms. Rosa Peral is.

A lot of time has gone by,

and I'd like to have a conversation
with my daughters.

Spend time with them.

I'd like to know if they have any doubts.

When I do, I'll say,

"Look, if you ever have any doubts,

it'd be good for you to hear
all sides of the story

and get as much information as possible."

Maybe they feel like
they don't have anything to ask.

I don't know.

Maybe in the future, they'll say,
"My mother always said she was innocent."

Maybe they don't even need an explanation.

I only hope that they include me

in their plans for the future, you know?

I'm more present in their lives
than I would've imagined.

Oops. I'm going to be cut off.
Wait. The call's about to drop.

Rosa Peral appealed her 25-year sentence.

In September 2021, the Supreme Court

approved the aggravating circumstance
of premeditation.

Antonia's testimony was nullified.

It was found the defendants
had taken measures

to ensure Pedro could not defend himself,

since he was attacked at home
"while he slept or rested."

Rosa is currently serving her sixth year
at Mas Enric Prison in Tarragona.

Subtitle translation by:
Soledad Etchemendy