This concludes teh proceedings, two months after the opening of an investigation for “rape” a few days after kylian Mbappé’s visit to Stockholm. The chief prosecutor in charge of the case, Marina Chirakova, returned to the reasons that led her to close this investigation, in which Kylian Mbappé was never officially named by the authorities.
«I’m not saying that no crime was committed,but we can’t prove it. We don’t have enough evidence, he said thursday morning RTL. For this reason I decided not to continue the investigation. »
“My conclusion, based on what has emerged in the case, is that new evidence, including the questioning of the person in question, will not change the state of the evidence at this point,” he also told AFP.Without naming the french captain,he specifies that the person targeted by the investigation “was not informed of a suspected crime”.
Investigators conducted “a large number of interviews”
“We conducted a large number of interviews as part of the investigation,” he said, and “there were other types of evidence, outside of interrogations, in this case.”
Marina Chirakova told RTL that the investigation “may be reopened if we have further evidence in the future. » “During the investigation, one person reasonably suspected of rape and two cases of sexual harassment were identified, but I believe that the evidence is not sufficient to continue the procedure and the investigation is therefore closed,” he stated in a press release issued this Thursday morning, noting the closure of the case.
The rape investigation was opened in mid-October, instantly after the player’s visit to the Swedish capital, but without his name ever being mentioned. The investigations were conducted at the bank Hotel, where the player had stayed, and some members of the staff were questioned.
According to him the player was not worried.”I haven’t received anything, no summons, nothing,” he explained in an interview on the “Cricca” program broadcast on Canal +. I read the same thing as everyone in the press… The Swedish government hasn’t said anything… So I’m not worried. »
Interview with Legal Expert on the Closure of the Kylian Mbappé Inquiry
By Time.news Editor
Q: Thank you for joining us today. We’ve seen a significant development in the investigation that was opened following Kylian mbappé’s visit to Stockholm. Can you explain what factors led to the closure of this case?
A: Thank you for having me. The chief prosecutor, Marina Chirakova, stated that while the case did raise serious allegations, the evidence was insufficient to continue the investigation. She mentioned that they could not prove a crime had been committed, which is a critical requirement for moving forward legally. The lack of concrete evidence, despite numerous interviews and inquiries, ultimately resulted in the case being closed.
Q: During the investigation, it was indicated that several individuals were interviewed. How crucial is the gathering of testimonies, and what did the prosecutor mean when she referenced that other types of evidence were obtained?
A: Gathering testimonies is essential in any legal investigation, especially in sensitive cases like this. It helps establish a narrative and can lend credibility to allegations. However, the prosecutor’s comments suggest that the investigation also sought other forms of evidence beyond just interviews, possibly including forensic evidence, video recordings, or physical proof which could corroborate or refute the claims made. This blend of evidence is crucial for validating any allegations made against an individual.
Q: It was pointed out that Mbappé himself was never officially named in the investigation. How does that affect the public’s perception and the legal implications for the individual involved?
A: The fact that Kylian Mbappé was never officially named is significant. Legally, it protects him from being implicated in the eyes of the law and potentially in the court of public opinion. It demonstrates the careful approach the authorities had in handling this case, which is vital in maintaining the integrity of the investigation. Nevertheless, the media coverage surrounding the case can still affect public perception, often leading to assumptions and conjectures that may not align with legal realities.
Q: After an investigation is closed, what options are typically available for reopening the case, as mentioned by Prosecutor Chirakova?
A: When investigations are closed due to insufficient evidence, they can often be reopened if new evidence comes to light. In this case, Prosecutor Chirakova indicated that the investigation might potentially be revisited if further credible information surfaces. This approach ensures that if additional, material evidence emerges – whether it’s new testimonies or corroborating details that were previously unavailable – justice can still be pursued.
Q: With this situation being highly publicized, what practical advice would you give to individuals involved in sensitive allegations to protect their rights and identity?
A: It’s crucial for anyone involved in sensitive allegations to be aware of their rights.Seeking legal counsel early on is essential to navigate the complexities of such situations. Additionally, maintaining privacy is important. Engage with the media cautiously and think carefully before making public statements. It’s also wise to avoid discussing details of the case publicly, as doing so can impact legal proceedings.
Q: what do you think this case signifies for the handling of allegations in the sports industry?
A: This case underscores the importance of a thorough and carefully balanced investigation process, especially in high-profile cases involving public figures like Kylian Mbappé. It reflects the ongoing challenges within the sports industry regarding how allegations of misconduct are managed and reported. The overall message is clear: investigations must be handled with integrity and diligence to protect both the alleged victims and the individuals accused.
Thank you for your insights. This discussion sheds light on the complexities and implications involved in high-profile legal situations.