Spain Spain - Ana Knezevich, 40, from Florida, going through divorce, missing under suspicious circumstances on trip to Madrid, 5 Feb 2024

[Sundog]

Hard evidence is required in Spain, too. The penal process can be initiated in different ways here. Either via a state body, El Ministerio Fiscal (equivalent to the State Prosecutor's Office), or via the various police forces. Alternatively, an injured party can directly 'denounce' a crime. However it reaches the court, the case is then reviewed by a judge or judges. If it's decided there is a case to answer, the court process plays out. If not, it ends there. This is obviously done on the basis of said evidence or lack thereof. If the police, in this case, were to approach Court 9 and present simply a hypothesis without any kind of evidence, it wouldn't get very far IMO.

But since the investigative process is done at both the pre-court stage AND at the in-court stage (just using these prefix descriptions as a way to explain my perspective on this), then I would think that a regular court (versus the women's specialized court) might transfer a case with what they perceive to belong more to the investigative jurisdiction of the specialized court given certain background of the case. It would be helpful to have a link to some standards that are used by the regular courts as to what criteria they would use in order to make this transfer to a women's specialized court. It would seem to me that the regular court could make this determination to transfer early on in their investigation without necessarily having the evidence to justify it, but rather based on the demographics of the case (woman, married, disappeared, husband in Serbia, couple going through divorce, family desribing it as acrimonious divorce, etc.).

JMO, but given the difference in how investigations work in the U.S. with investigations taking place before a case can get to court, and the fact that in Spain investigations occur both before and during the court process, then I think it is reasonable to suggest that the transfer to the specialized court may be pro forma based on certain demographic and background issues.

 

[kaya3627]

But since the investigative process is done at both the pre-court stage AND at the in-court stage (just using these prefix descriptions as a way to explain my perspective on this), then I would think that a regular court (versus the women's specialized court) might transfer a case with what they perceive to belong more to the investigative jurisdiction of the specialized court given certain background of the case. It would be helpful to have a link to some standards that are used by the regular courts as to what criteria they would use in order to make this transfer to a women's specialized court. It would seem to me that the regular court could make this determination to transfer early on in their investigation without necessarily having the evidence to justify it, but rather based on the demographics of the case (woman, married, disappeared, husband in Serbia, couple going through divorce, family desribing it as acrimonious divorce, etc.).

JMO, but given the difference in how investigations work in the U.S. with investigations taking place before a case can get to court, and the fact that in Spain investigations occur both before and during the court process, then I think it is reasonable to suggest that the transfer to the specialized court may be pro forma based on certain demographic and background issues.

From my understanding it's not just a "women's court." It's a Violence Against Women's court.

Does the court randomly assign cases to this court simply because a woman is involved?

 

[Sundog]

According to this article, all cases that potentially involve domestic violence against women must be transferred to the specialized court and that court will undertake the investigation. So I assume that it is standard protocol for the criminal court in Spain to refer/transfer a case like Ana's to the specialized court for the investigative phase.

In those districts in which an IPV [ intimate partner violence} court exists, all IPV cases are automatically transferred to the specialized IPV court for the investigation phase of the trial. IPV courts are primarily investigation courts.

See more excerpts below, and sections bolded by me. (Note: IVP abbreviation in the article stands for "Intimate Partner Violence."

If a victim reports an IPV offense to the police or if the police are aware or suspect of an IPV case e.g., they assist a victim, they receive a report from a hospital, etc.), then they have the obligation to report it to the court, which opens the judicial process. Secondly, victims can also report an IPV offense directly to the court rather than to the police. Finally, a third person who is aware of IPV cases can also report them directly to the court or to the police, thus opening the legal procedure. This may happen, for example, when doctors in hospitals or medical centers become aware of an IPV case, where protocols obligate them to report potential IPV cases to the court.The vast majority of the IPV cases are nonetheless initiated via victim’s report to the police (i.e.,70% of claims in 2019), while the initiation via a direct victim report in the court or through a third person report is typically less frequent. It is important to note that every report of IPV regardless of whether it is made to the police or directly to the court and whether this is done by the victim or a third person, opens an IPV case in the court. The registration of the IPV case in the court is conducted immediately after the victim or a third person report it to the police or to the court.The next step of the judicial process in an IPV case is the investigation phase. In those districts in which an IPV court exists, all IPV cases are automatically transferred to the specialized IPV court for the investigation phase of the trial. IPV courts are primarily investigation courts. The judges in these courts lead the investigations, decide on whether to dismiss the cases In 2019, the percentage of IPV cases in which the victim directly report the offense in the court was only 1.9% and a third person (including the victim’s relatives) was about a 3.6% of the total number of IPV cases (Spanish Ministry for Equality, 2019).If there is no IPV court in the district, the investigation phase of the IPV cases is conducted in ordinary investigation courts. Once the investigation phase of the trial is concluded and if the case is not dismissed, the case is transferred from the IPV court or the ordinary investigation court to the relevant criminal court for the oral trial phase of the judicial procedure, which leads to either the acquittal or the conviction of the defendant. The oral trial phase is typically conducted in a different court than the investigation phase although there are two exceptions. Judges in IPV or ordinary investigation courts will also lead the oral trial phase and pass sentences for (a) minor IPV cases such as insults and for (b) IPV cases in which the offender is recognized during the judicial investigation being the crime perpetrator. Specialized IPV courts were designed with the explicit goal of speeding up the judicial IPV cases and providing resources to address the specific needs that victims may have due to he psychological aspects of this type of violence. These courts are typically equipped with special resources, such as a curtain to provide a partition when the victim testifies or the possibility to testify through online calls. In some of them, specialized psychologists and social workers are also available to support and inform the victim from the very early stages of the judicial procedure.While the judgment stage is typically executed in the criminal court in most IPV cases regardless of whether there is or not a specialized IPV court in the district, the investigation stage is a crucial stage in IPV judicial processes and involve gathering judicial evidence, issue protection orders and the potential dismissal of the case. It is also the most onerous for the victim because it starts immediately after the report and can involve several interactions. Indeed, while the average duration of an IPV case in an IPV court is approximately 50 days, the length of an IPV case in an ordinary investigation court is approximately 110 days. The victims in IPV courts receive a direct audience in a very short time. In addition, while judges in ordinary investigation courts deal with a wider set of criminal offenses, judges in IPV courts only deal with IPV cases, which allows judge specialization and reduces the workload in these courts.

Source - https://docs.iza.org/dp14936.pdf
Specialized Courts and the Reporting of Intimate Partner Violence: Evidence from Spain

 

[Charlot123]

Even if they have a case, the defendant has a hypothesis of innocence, regardless of any "hard evidence." Both sides argue their hypotheses, and "hard evidence" may help to strengthen their hypothesis.

In light of OJ's recent passing, there was "hard evidence" that he was guilty. However, that hypothesis was proven false by the jury, who decided that OJ's innocence was the more likely hypothesis.

You have just compared the “even if” poi with a known criminal, btw.

OJ’s TV trial was a watershed case, but as always, a rich man goes into history and a poor one is almost forgotten. Were it not for the beating of Rodney King in 1991 and LA riots of 1992, maybe OJ’s case would have ended differently. Plus, OJ was acquitted only by a criminal court jury. OJ was deemed liable in a civil court, and supposed to pay $33 mln to the families of victims. Plus consider that book of his, “if I did it.” Just because OJ won the TV trial with great lawyers, weak prosecution and overall negative public opinion of LA police at that time, in no way means that he was innocent. (Plus, OJ still managed to get behind bars in 2008 for armed robbery. They let him out in 2017 because he was ill.)

 

[FacelessPodcast]

We can say for certain Ana’s case is now being handled by Court 9. E-mail from the Press Officer of the Superior Tribunal of Justice:

Indeed. That's right. The judicial investigation of the matter in which you are interested is indeed being processed in the Court of Violence Against Women No. 9 of Madrid. For the moment, the proceedings are secret.

 

[indicolite22]

But since the investigative process is done at both the pre-court stage AND at the in-court stage (just using these prefix descriptions as a way to explain my perspective on this), then I would think that a regular court (versus the women's specialized court) might transfer a case with what they perceived to belong more to the specialized court than the regular court. That would make complete sense to me. That is why I am calling it possibly a pro forma transfer. If we could find the criteria online somewhere that provides the standards for such a transfer, that would be helpful. But since it is still an open investigation at the stage of the transfer, then to me the transfer doesn't mean very much in terms of hard evidence in the case.

If this was suspected to be a random kidnapping by a stranger, would the case have been transferred to a women's court? What about if she was targeted by a stalker?

 

[indicolite22]

It is important to note that every report of IPV regardless of whether it is made to the police or directly to the court and whether this is done by the victim or a third person, opens an IPV case in the court.

Source - https://docs.iza.org/dp14936.pdf
Specialized Courts and the Reporting of Intimate Partner Violence: Evidence from Spain

SBM. Was intimate partner violence ever reported in Ana's case? Her husband didn't live with her and there seems to be no history of physical violence in their marriage.

 

[Sundog]

If this was suspected to be a random kidnapping by a stranger, would the case have been transferred to a women's court? What about if she was targeted by a stalker?

My point was that if the ordinary criminal court has any suspicion that domestic violence is involved in a case, then they automatically transfer it to the specialized court that investigates cases of possible violence against women. The criminal court wouldn't need hard evidence to make this transfer, just enough suspicion that DV could be involved. Such as family members saying that there was an acrimonious divorce underway, the spouse went to Serbia instead of helping to search for the missing wife, the spouse was selling off some of the marital assets, etc. That wasn't necessarily investigated by the criminal court, but enough to have to transfer the case to the specialized court that handles possible violence against women and the specialized court does the investigation. There was not necessarily any evidence in the criminal court in order for them to automatically make the case transfer to the specialized court. The specialized court will investigate the case.

 

[Sundog]

SBM. Was intimate partner violence ever reported in Ana's case? Her husband didn't live with her and there seems to be no history of physical violence in their marriage.

The family went to court through their representative who leads Spain's missing persons organization. They are speculating that the husband could have been involved in Ana's disappearance. That's enough, apparently, to open an investigation in Spain with details such as regarding selling her assets, moving to Serbia, not helping with the search for Ana, refusing to take a lie detector test, etc. Once an investigation is open, they transfer it to the specialized court so that court can do the investigation with its specialized resources.

JMO based on research and article posted above on how the specialized court works in Spain. It is described as an "investigative court."

 

[FacelessPodcast]

The family went to court through their representative who leads Spain's missing persons organization. They are speculating that the husband could have been involved in Ana's disappearance. That's enough, apparently, to open an investigation in Spain…

RSMB:

Are you certain the family didn't raise a complaint with the police about Ana's disappearance and it was the police who lodged this case with the courts? National broadcasters and newspapers are both saying there is evidence of criminality in Ana's apartment so it's reasonable to assume that is what the police have put forward. As per the article you posted above, the vast majority of IPV cases go through the police.

My point was that if the ordinary criminal court has any suspicion that domestic violence is involved in a case, then they automatically transfer it to the specialized court that investigates cases of possible violence against women. The criminal court wouldn't need hard evidence to make this transfer, just enough suspicion that DV could be involved.

At any rate, conceptos juridicos says this:

When a judge in the violence against women tribunal determines that the facts presented to their office does not constitute an expression of gender violence, they are capacitated to not admit the case and remit it to the relevant judicial organ.

So, I guess if there is no evidence of domestic violence here (which has an extremely broad definition as per this page which doesn't necessarily mean physical), then Court 51 would kick it back to 9 or dismiss it altogether.

 

[Sundog]

RSMB:

Are you certain the family didn't raise a complaint with the police about Ana's disappearance and it was the police who lodged this case with the courts? National broadcasters and newspapers are both saying there is evidence of criminality in Ana's apartment so it's reasonable to assume that is what the police have put forward. As per the article you posted above, the vast majority of IPV cases go through the police.

At any rate, conceptos juridicos says this:

When a judge in the violence against women tribunal determines that the facts presented to their office does not constitute an expression of gender violence, they are capacitated to not admit the case and remit it to the relevant judicial organ.

So, I guess if there is no evidence of domestic violence here (which has an extremely broad definition as per this page which doesn't necessarily mean physical), then Court 51 would kick it back to 9 or dismiss it altogether.

I don't know for sure that Ana's family and friends took the case to the criminal court in Spain, but since they were represented by one of Spain's leading Missing Persons organization, I think it's possible that the Missing Persons organization leader went to the criminal court in spain to lodge a complaint on the family's/friends' behalf. Or perhaps they went to LE and that's how the complaint got started and made it to the criminal court. Either way, court 9 transferred the case to court 51 as they are required to do if they have any suspicion of domestic or partner violence against AK. So the investigative court is the specialized court for violence against women and I agree that 51 could find no evidence of DV and refer the case back to the regular court (9). Even if the specialized court (51) finds evidence of domestic/partner violence, my understanding is that the specialized court will transfer the case back to the regular criminal court (9) in order to prosecute the case.

As you note, LE may have found some evidence related to AK's disapperance, but we only know that from MSM reports that do not give specific LE confirmation. So I guess we will have to wait and see as court #51 investigates the case, or court #9 gets the case back and continues their criminal investigation that is not based on domestic/partner violence.
Either way, at least there is an investigation by the courts taking place with the hope of finding out what happened to Ana.

It's always interesting to learn how different judicial systems work around the world. Ultimately, there doesn't seem to be much difference in Spain for the U.S. system except at the investigative stage, which in the U.S. doesn't involve the court. LE are the investigative body here, prosecution and/or grand jury decide if it goes to court based on whether or not their is enough evidence to charge a person with a crime and reasonable to believe that they can get a conviction if it does go to court.

 

[arielilane]

The American woman who seemingly vanished while on a trip in Spain remains missing as her estranged husband is reportedly refusing to take a polygraph test. Ana Knezevich disappeared in Madrid in February after a bitter split from David Knezevich.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1783171544539385997

 

[Sundog]

The American woman who seemingly vanished while on a trip in Spain remains missing as her estranged husband is reportedly refusing to take a polygraph test. Ana Knezevich disappeared in Madrid in February after a bitter split from David Knezevich.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1783171544539385997

After watching this video, it appears to be just a recap of the case, nothing new reported.

Also, the retired FBI agent interviewed here stated that polygraphs are "very, very subjective," and an attorney would advise his/her client not to take a polygraph test. So its not surprising or unusual that AK's husband, DK, would not take a polygraph test.