The case of the boy Henry Borel, who died at the age of 4 in Rio, led to several comparisons with the death of Isabella Nardoni, in São Paulo, in 2008. In both cases, the parents and their respective partners were considered suspicious and investigated for the deaths of the children .
However, the performance of the police and the history of relationships between family members are some of the discrepancies between the two cases, as far as investigations are known to date.
Know the seven main differences.
In London, a building in the northern part of the capital where Isabella was killed in March 2008, there was no camera system in the elevators. As there was also no eye witness, it was not possible to know for sure how the family went up to the apartment and, later, how they went down to try to help the victim.
In Rio, the cameras cleared doubts about the suspects ‘movement and allowed them to see how the boy left the family’s apartment, before going to the hospital. They also allowed to rule out the possibility that a third person could have accessed the suspects’ floor by social elevator.
In SP, the police and prosecutors were unable to provide evidence of mistreatment and a violent profile of the defendants. Alexandre’s ex-girlfriend, for example, doubts their participation in the crime.
Through witnesses and breach of secrecy, the Rio police have been putting together a profile of the removed alderman Jairo Souza Santos Júnior, indicating that he is a violent person and with a possible history of ill-treatment against the victim.
Isabella loved to visit her father’s and stepmother’s apartment. The weekend she was killed, she asked to be taken the day before the appointment. After the crime, the mother’s family came to defend the couple.
Henry had revealed his desire not to want to live with her mother and boyfriend and said he preferred to be at his grandparents’ house. The night he was killed, when he was taken by his father, he wept to the point of vomiting, not wanting to go home.
Anna Carolina, the stepmother, was emotionally and financially dependent on Alexander. She moved in with him in the fourth month of dating, at the age of 19. On the day of the crime, she was a 25-year-old housewife with two children, 3 years old and 11 months old.
Monique was not known to have any financial dependence on her boyfriend, although she improved her economic situation and managed to get a job at the Municipal Court of Auditors after she started dating a councilor. They dated less than a year ago and have lived together since December.
In the Nardoni case, the investigation advanced in some points and even used untrue information, such as the existence of the victim’s blood in the vehicle transport chair and drops of blood on the floor of the room, something that would be known only after the trial.
The reports known up to the time of the Henry case did not exceed the limits assigned to the expert’s work. They say, for example, that there were no signs of mistreatment, although it describes the child’s internal injuries.
The Nardoni couple were arrested before the end of the first week of investigation over an internal police fight, according to delegates. This interfered with the quality of the evidence.
In Rio, the police arrested the couple at the end of the 30th day when they already had enough material to convince themselves of the participation of the mother and her boyfriend in the child’s death.
In SP, the victim’s mother was heard at the beginning of the investigations, as well as the whole family, and the police gave great weight to her words. At the trial, part of the discussions focused on issues such as the payment of a pension, Easter eggs and the name of the teacher that the father did not remember.
The Rio Civil Police did not make the testimony of the victim’s father, engineer Leniel, the main basis of the investigations. As he was not at the crime scene, his testimony is considered circumstantial and can be influenced by an eventual animosity between separated couples.