The injuries scattered across his body told a different story entirely.
No Tribunal do Júri do Rio de Janeiro, o julgamento pelo assassinato de Henry Borel avançou na sexta-feira com o peso da evidência forense e a ausência eloquente dos dois réus. Jairinho e Monique Medeiros retiraram-se da sala alegando problemas de saúde — ela ao ver as fotografias da autópsia, ele durante o depoimento do legista — e não estavam presentes quando o pai da criança prestou seu testemunho. É um daqueles momentos em que a ausência fala tão alto quanto qualquer palavra: a acusação construiu sua fundação técnica diante do júri, e os acusados escolheram, ou precisaram, não testemunhá-la.
- Peritos forenses descartaram completamente a teoria do acidente doméstico, afirmando que o padrão de lesões em múltiplas regiões do corpo de Henry é incompatível com uma única queda.
- A saída de Monique no meio da apresentação das fotos da autópsia e a de Jairinho durante o depoimento do legista deixaram o banco dos réus vazio num dos momentos mais críticos do julgamento.
- O pai de Henry, Leniel Borel, prestou depoimento na ausência dos dois acusados — uma lacuna que o tribunal e o júri certamente notaram.
- A juíza ordenou o retorno de Monique para o sábado, sinalizando que as ausências não serão toleradas indefinidamente à medida que o julgamento avança.
- Com a base técnica da acusação solidificada, a pressão sobre a defesa cresce: o júri já viu as provas, já ouviu os especialistas, e agora precisa decidir o que elas significam.
Na sexta-feira, o Tribunal do Júri do Rio de Janeiro registrou uma ausência dupla: Jairinho, ex-vereador, e Monique Medeiros, os dois réus no caso Henry Borel, deixaram a sala alegando problemas de saúde em momentos distintos do dia. Monique saiu por volta das 12h40 após passar mal durante a exibição das fotografias da autópsia, com autorização da juíza Elizabeth Machado Louro para se retirar — mas com ordem de retornar no sábado. Jairinho partiu mais tarde, durante o depoimento do legista, com seus advogados informando que ele precisava de medicação.
Nenhum dos dois estava presente quando Leniel Borel, pai de Henry, subiu ao banco das testemunhas. E foi justamente nessa sexta-feira que a acusação apresentou sua espinha dorsal técnica: o legista Luiz Airton Saavedra e o perito criminal Luiz Carlos Leal Prestes descreveram ao júri, em detalhe, as lesões encontradas no corpo da criança. O padrão de traumas múltiplos em diferentes regiões do corpo, resultado de força contundente, era incompatível com qualquer acidente doméstico. Saavedra foi além: Henry provavelmente já estava morto quando saiu do apartamento.
Não era a primeira vez que Monique demonstrava reação emocional diante das provas. No segundo dia de julgamento, ela cobrira o rosto durante fotos exibidas pela defesa de Jairinho. Na quarta-feira, chorou ao ver um vídeo de Henry dançando, enquanto um médico descrevia as tentativas de reanimação no hospital. Essas reações, somadas às ausências de sexta, compõem um retrato de crescente pressão sobre os réus à medida que as evidências se acumulam.
O julgamento continua no sábado. O júri já ouviu os especialistas, já viu as fotografias, já escutou o pai. O que resta é o peso da deliberação — decidir se o que a ciência forense descreveu aponta, sem dúvida razoável, para a culpa dos dois que não estavam lá para ouvir.
The courtroom in Rio's Tribunal do Júri was missing two people on Friday who were supposed to be there. Jairo Souza Santos Júnior—known as Jairinho, a former city councilman—left the jury box citing illness, his defense team saying he needed medication and wasn't feeling well. Hours earlier, Monique Medeiros, the other defendant in the case, had already departed after becoming unwell during the presentation of autopsy photographs. Neither was present when Leniel Borel, the father of the dead child, took the stand to testify.
The case concerns the death of Henry Borel, a young boy whose body bore injuries that forensic experts spent Friday describing in meticulous detail to the jury. The medical examiner Luiz Airton Saavedra and criminal investigator Luiz Carlos Leal Prestes both presented evidence that painted a consistent picture: the child had not died in an accident. The injuries scattered across his body—multiple, severe, the result of blunt force trauma—told a different story entirely. Saavedra testified that Henry had likely already been dead when he left the apartment.
The forensic investigator had been even more direct. When shown photographs of the injuries during his testimony, he told the jury that the domestic accident theory was completely ruled out. The pattern of wounds across different regions of the body indicated what he called signs of beating—impacts against hard surfaces, repeated blows. The multiplicity of injuries, he explained, was incompatible with a single fall or accident. This was the prosecution's technical foundation, and it was solid.
Monique's departure came during the investigator's presentation of the autopsy images. According to the court, she requested medical evaluation around 12:40 in the afternoon, telling the judge she needed to lie down. Judge Elizabeth Machado Louro permitted her to leave but ordered her to return Saturday. This was not Monique's first emotional reaction to the evidence. On the second day of the trial, she had covered her face during autopsy photographs shown by Jairinho's defense. On Wednesday, she wept while watching a video of Henry dancing—footage played while a doctor explained the resuscitation attempts made at Barra D'Or Hospital.
Jairinho's departure came later, during Saavedra's testimony. His lawyers told the court he was unwell and needed to receive medication. The judge did not order him to return, at least not in the reporting available. The absence of both defendants as the father testified—as the technical evidence of what happened to his son was laid out for the jury—created an unusual tableau: the accused were not present to hear the case being made against them, or to see the father of the victim speak.
The trial continues Saturday. Monique has been ordered back. The jury has now heard from the medical and forensic experts, and they have seen the photographs and the evidence. What remains is for the jury to weigh it all, to decide whether the injuries described by the experts, the pattern of trauma, the ruling out of accident, points toward guilt or toward something else. The father's testimony on Friday was the last witness of the day, delivered to a courtroom that had emptied of the two people most directly implicated in what the evidence suggests happened to his son.
Notable Quotes
The domestic accident theory is completely ruled out; the pattern of injuries indicates signs of beating compatible with blunt force impacts.— Criminal investigator Luiz Carlos Leal Prestes, testifying to the jury
The injuries found on the child's body are incompatible with an accidental fall, and he was likely already dead when he left the apartment.— Medical examiner Luiz Airton Saavedra
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did both defendants leave on the same day? Was it coordinated, or coincidence?
The timing suggests something different for each. Monique left during the autopsy photos—visual evidence she'd already struggled with before. Jairinho left during the medical examiner's testimony, later in the day. His lawyers said he needed medication. Whether it was coordinated or just two people reaching their limit under the same pressure, the court record doesn't say.
What does it mean that the father testified while they were gone?
Symbolically, it's stark. Leniel Borel was there to speak about his son while the two people accused of killing him were absent. The jury heard from him without them present to respond or react. It's the kind of detail that shapes how a trial feels, even if legally it doesn't change what evidence was presented.
How solid is the forensic case against them?
The experts were unambiguous. No accident. Multiple injuries in different areas. Signs of beating. The medical examiner said the child was likely already dead when he left the apartment. That's not equivocal testimony—that's a clear line drawn by the evidence.
Has Monique shown other signs of strain?
Yes. She's reacted emotionally several times—covering her face at autopsy photos, crying during a video of Henry dancing while doctors explained resuscitation efforts. Friday wasn't her first breaking point. The accumulation of seeing and hearing the details of what happened to the child seems to be wearing on her.
What happens next?
The trial continues Saturday. Monique is ordered to return. The jury has heard the technical case. Now they have to deliberate on what it means, whether it proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The father's testimony was the last witness of the day—the human anchor to all the forensic detail.