Trial over injury to Roger Español, nine years later

9 years later, the trial regarding the injury sustained by Roger Español begins[/B][/SIZE]

The lawsuit concerning the rubber shot that injured Roger Español during the referendum begins nine years after the incident. The oral hearing opens without any change in the core issue: when is a rubber shot against a demonstration proportionate? Español has insisted that at that moment, no protester posed a threat and that there were no throws toward the police line.

What the injured party admits

Roger Español has admitted that he threw barriers, which he found at a construction site, onto the road to prevent police advance toward the next polling point. He adds that he did not direct them at any officer. The defense will play into this context; the prosecution, with the outcome: a severed optic nerve.

This case has generated two viewpoints difficult to reconcile. One focuses on the impunity of riot police and the slowness of the judicial process. The other, on the behavior of the protester and the cost borne by the taxpayer, according to some commentary. In between, the victim's surname has inspired streams of ironic commentary.

Why the trial is taking nine years to arrive

The figure itself is the real headline. Nine years between the shot and the hearing. For a case involving injury, that lapse is not an anecdote: it blurs memories, wears down witnesses, and leaves the victim with the damage already consolidated, without a real margin for repair.

One eye lost, one trial, and nearly a decade in between. Slowness, however, does not sit on the defendant's bench.