Ripoll detainee: no explosives, only airsoft hobby

Ripoll detainee: no explosives, no bullets, just airsoft hobby

There are no firearms in the Ripoll detainee’s case. No explosives. No fertilizers. Not a single bullet. At least, that is what the affected individual maintains, having submitted his written account before the case goes to trial. Against this narrative stands an open investigation for alleged possession of prohibited weapons, initiated in the Basque Country and later transferred to his local court, with a file he describes as significantly deflated.

What was and was not found in the Ripoll search

According to his version, none of the elements typically associated with an anti-terrorism operation were found at his home. No weapons, no explosives, no fertilizers, no bomb-making components, no ammunition. What was there was a workshop he describes as a table and a shelf with various junk, none of which he considers illegal.

The seized barrels, according to his description, have a diameter incompatible with real ammunition. Most are aluminum, designed for paintball or airsoft, or too thin in gauge. The photo he refers to does not show an arsenal: it shows a hobby. Among the cited materials, he argues, the self-defense aspects weighed more than the video that authorized the entry. He shared excerpts from a book on preparedness and self-defense he was writing, which was flagged as dangerous.

July 24 markers: the technical debate

The origin of all this, he says, was a YouTube channel about air weapons that never launched. He had posted shooting tests and material to improve the trigger and reliability of a paintball marker. This content, he claims, was interpreted as a tutorial for manufacturing firearms. On his desktop, he says, there were three scripted episodes with humor and shooting tests.

None of the replicas would exceed 24 joules in expert tests, and he claims he had chronographs to ensure nothing exceeded the legal limit. This figure, however, is not settled. A technical analysis suggests that 24 joules is excessive for airsoft, requiring deep modifications and barely resisting low-mass ammunition without destroying it. Even accepting the figure, the core debate remains alive.

From the station to the caged van: hour-by-hour arrest

The police treatment, he says, was not bad. He spent an afternoon detained in the station premises, without cells, in conversations he describes as relaxed. When officers confirmed they found nothing they were looking for, he adds, they were almost as surprised as he was. One, according to his account, apologized personally. They tried to expedite paperwork so he could sleep at home, but he was not released.

The night was different. He slept in another town with cells, and the next morning was transported in a van with an individual cage. At the courthouse, he refused to testify and was released pending trial. What he regrets most, he writes, is the distress his family suffered over Christmas.

Article 563 and hate crime: the two legal fronts

The first is the possession of prohibited weapons. Article 563 of the Penal Code punishes with one to three years in prison the possession of prohibited weapons and those resulting from substantial modification of regulated weapons. The question is whether compressed air replicas, if altered, fall under this category. The court will decide.

The second front is the hate crime. His version is that the macho and racist profile attributed to him would be debunked if someone read his writings calmly. He acknowledges that, due to his Asperger’s condition, he has never had much common sense, that he has already apologized in case his texts were misinterpreted, and that he deleted the content on his own initiative.

The media circus and a newsroom’s response

His central complaint is not police-related, but informational. He claims that contacting the media backfired and that the coverage already had the new monster ready to sell: the supposed supremacist with a 3D printer. He recounts that a newsroom replied to him with a simple “OK.” From the entire episode, he draws a practical consequence: he has lost the desire to launch an air weapons channel.

Who claims this is all a setup

Not everyone trinc the case buys the narrative. Some argue the story fits too well and could be an interested construction. Others, however, rely on details not typically found in a hoax: the lack of cells in the first station, the caged van, the refusal to testify, and a trial without a date. The discrepancy, for now, will not be resolved on the internet.

With the expert report pending and no trial date set, it is likely the case will fade before being fully clarified. If the case is dismissed or ends in acquittal, it remains to be seen whether anyone retracts what was published.