Fatal Rope Jump Case Explodes with New Arrests

More reported arrests in [music] the. tragic death of a young woman apparently. tossed off an abandoned bridge in Brazil. in a rope jumping incident gone [music]. horribly wrong. Now, there are. allegations of deleting and hiding. evidence. Welcome to Sidebar, presented. by Law & Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. [music]. Okay, so we got more updates for you in. this Brazilian rope jumping case that. we've been on top of since the very. beginning. This is the one in which. 21-year-old Maria Eduarda Rodrigues de.

Freitas plunged to her death in a roping. incident. She was allegedly tossed off. an abandoned bridge, wasn't attached to. any ropes or any cords 130 ft down. This. is a horrific horrific death. And it all. was apparently caught on video that is. circulated on social media. You have. three instructors, Luis Filipe Feliciano. Egoroff, 32 years old, Vitor de Freitas. Gonçalves, 27, and Maicon Fernandes. Cintra, 42. They were arrested. They.

were charged with homicide with eventual. intent or eventual malice. Two of them. allegedly fled the scene before they. were captured. And according to NBC. News, Brazilian law characterizes these. charges as killing someone not. necessarily with the intent to kill, but. by engaging in a dangerous act that. carries a known risk of death, assuming. the risk. And they reportedly claim that. they were in shock, that they blacked. out, they don't remember whose job it. was to secure Maria Eduarda. That's.

based on the reporting that we're. seeing. In fact, defense counsel. associated in this case also reportedly. told the G1 outlet that these. individuals were highly experienced. Delegate Andrea Dantas Leite told the. outlet Globo that the company operating. this rope jump, quote, "didn't even have. authorization to be there." So, there's. already a lot to get into. There's. already a lot to think about. But as I. said, we have new developments that we. got to talk about. So, just came out. First, there are new images. New images. that came out about this. There was a. video that was posted on EPTV on.

YouTube, different angle of the. incident. It again appears to show the. instructors are carrying Maria Eduarda. superman style, airplane style over the. platform and that is when they allegedly. toss her over. But in the video, you can. seemingly hear the person recording this. saying, "Look at this." And then someone. else say, "Oh my god." And then after. Maria Eduarda is apparently tossed over. the platform, you hear the person.

recording saying, "No, no, stop, stop, stop people. A rope broke." You can see. how the instructors are reacting, seemingly looking shocked, almost frozen. in place. And now, now the big update, three more members of this team have. reportedly been arrested. And according. to the New York Post, they had roles or. alleged roles in planning and carrying. out this activity. Apparently, the. arrest happened over the weekend on. Saturday, June 20th. According to Globo, they are Evelyn dos Santos Goncalves,

allegedly responsible for the informal. company that performed the jumps. Joao. Antonio Poveda Ribeiro da Silva, who was. reportedly positioned down on the ground. below the bridge, and Gabriel Barros. Martins, who allegedly left the scene. after the fall, allegedly wasn't. cooperative with police. This is. according to Bacci Noticias. And there's. now this There's this accusation that. either all of them or some of them. There's an accusation of deleting.

digital material, like the social media. pages for the company Ante Cordas. There's also suspicion that they may. have been involved in taking the camera, this possible GoPro camera, that Maria. Eduarda had allegedly been holding. during the rope jump. In fact, MSN. reports that an eyewitness to this. incident, Rafael Gular, who was. apparently next in line to jump after. Maria Eduarda, told the media he saw an. employee remove this camera, remove the.

GoPro from Maria Eduarda's neck strap as. she was lying on the ground. Said he. viewed it as, quote, either they were. worried about the equipment or wanting. to hide evidence. According to 9.com.au, a court order has been issued for the. search and seizure of phones and. electronic devices and other evidence. According to the New Delhi, temporary. arrest warrants were issued for a. five-day period. There is reportedly. suspicion of knowingly accepting the. risk of Maria Eduarda's death and.

obstruction of justice. Now, it's not. entirely clear if they were temporarily. arrested or if they've been charged. officially, but I'm going to bring on a. Brazilian criminal defense attorney to. talk about this, explain to us what's. going on here cuz I know it can get. confusing. It's confusing for me. The. office of the Secretary of Public. Security of São Paulo in a statement. said, "I've seen many deaths, crimes, criminals that practice extreme sports. I have never seen such a disgusting and. emblematic case of disregard for. security and the lives of others as this.

one." That's quite a statement. Another. statement, quote, "The civil police are. continuing their investigations to fully. clarify the dynamics of the events, identify all criminal responsibilities, and locate the camera used by the victim. at the time of the jump, considered an. important element for reconstructing. what happened." Well, I have to talk. about this camera. I want to get into. that, too. Hey, real quick. Any cat. owners out there? Because here's the. point. Who does not want their cat to be. healthy and happy, right? Feeding them.

Smalls, that's the next best thing. Most. cat food out there is made with cheap. fillers and meat byproducts and. artificial ingredients, and your cat's. health is paying the price. That's the. truth. But Smalls is different. Their. recipes are made with preservative-free. 100% human-grade ingredients that you. would find right in your fridge. Cats. rely on protein for energy. They also. need a lot of hydration to stay healthy. and toned and luckily Smalls contains at. least 80% animal protein and their fresh. ingredients are gently cooked to retain. all their nutrients, hydration, flavor. 88% of cat parents report that after.

feeding them Smalls, their cats have. better digestion, shinier coats, more. energy to play. The experts have also. been raving about it. Forbes ranked. Smalls the best overall cat food. BuzzFeed reviewers reported that their. cats went ballistic for this stuff. Your. cat's health starts with what they eat. Try Smalls, get 60% off of your first. order plus free shipping and treats for. life when you go to smalls.com/sidebar. Now, apparently, this is interesting, too. There was a social media influencer.

on scene that day. Reportedly acted as a. form of technical support. This is a guy. named Luis Gustavo de Oliveira, according to Bacci Notícias. The outlet. reports that he had been working with. this team for about a year. And that. day, he was about 4 m away from the. platform, but had his back to what had. happened because he was apparently. preparing a jump for the next. participant. This is what he reportedly. told authorities. In a statement that. was translated to English, he said, quote, "I have received many messages in.

recent days about the case of the. tragedy in Lumiar. For now, I have. chosen not to publicly express myself on. the subject as there are still ongoing. procedures and investigations in the. case. I'm not omitting myself or being. indifferent to what happened. At the. right time, I will speak clearly. I. appreciate everyone's understanding." By. the way, Maria Eduarda's family released. a statement that said, quote, "It is. essential that all responsibilities are. rigorously ascertained and that all. those involved are duly held accountable. for their actions and omissions." Okay,

I want to bring back on here on Sidebar, Adrielle Barca, who's Brazilian criminal. defense attorney. She was on with us. last time when we were covering this. Thank you so much for coming back on. want talk about it. So, am I accurate. that are we accurate when we're seeing. the reporting that three more people. were arrested? >> Yes. >> But, have they been charged? >> Not officially, but yes. Um they're on temporary prison right.

now. Which is the type of imprisonment where. you stay there for a amount of time to. make sure the investigation runs. smoothly. >> So, do you know what charges or what. suspicion of charges they are arrested. and detained on? I was seeing that it. could be a potentially I don't know if. it's the same charges that the. instructors are facing. I don't know if. it's an obstruction charge, but what are. they being detained on? What charges or. suspicion of charges? >> The charges are the same as the the ones.

that were caught in the act. Which is homicide with intent. >> And by the way, just to clear up, is it. still homicide with intent or homicide. with eventual intent? You know, homicide. with eventual malice. Is that what it. is? >> Yes. The the eventual part is only. important to make sure that they can. classify this as intent, but officially. is. homicide with intent. >> Let me ask you that the people that were. just arrested,

why do you think that they were arrested. or why do you think they were arrested. now? Um because clearly they had. different uh alleged roles, right? They. weren't the people in the video, but it. seems to me that they had a role in this. whole rope jumping activity. They were. in different places that day, and. there's also this allegation that they. might have been hiding evidence. >> Yes. The accusation is that they were. part of the team that was making sure. this rope jumping was happening. One of. the people that were arrested is the one.

that was at the bottom of the bridge, which is accused of hiding the camera, which wasn't found yet. But, a witness. says that they saw him pick up the. camera from the body. >> But, I guess I'm a little confused. If. they weren't the ones that actually. helped prepare the rope and allegedly. threw her off the platform, how could. they be potentially charged with. homicide? >> At this point, the judge is going to. pick up everybody that is involved in. this act. Later on, when it comes to the.

judgment, this is going to be dealt with. very differently. The last time we spoke, um. I talked about the difficulty that it is. to make sure every individual action is. pointed out in the trial. Because within. law, you have to point out individually. which part everybody did. Which is the. action or omission that everybody was. responsible for. At this point, I don't. see them evaluating this part. I just.

see them involving everybody that was in. the company as a potential. criminal. >> When they're detained, what happens with. the investigation? I was reading that. they. that search and seizure, I believe, warrants of their electronic devices and. other evidence has been issued. Is that. what's happening right now? Their. materials are being searched? >> Yes. >> And what. >> will point out that that could have been. done That could have been done without. them being arrested. There was no need. for them to be arrested at this point.

>> So, let's just back up. Why do you think. they were arrested at this point? >> The specification of the court is that. those arrests are made to make sure the. investigation is not interfered with, but they were not interfering with the. with the investigation so far. >> Well, they're accused of hiding evidence. and destroying. video and allegedly taking the the GoPro. camera. So, I think I can understand. that. >> Yes, this camera is very important to.

the investigation. I hope they find it. sometime. Because the camera was the. with the the victim the whole time. And. the camera is going to show if she. noticed that she had a no rope, if she. has to stop, if she was aware, if they. were aware that she had no rope. >> I imagine if she had the camera on her. before they picked her up, right? It. would capture the conversations they had. about the rope and whether or not she's. looking around if they ever secured it. Because there still seems to be. confusion as to how this even happened.

And there still seems to be confusion as. to whose responsibility it was to. actually secure her, right? >> Exactly. >> There was an allegation about maybe. social media pages being scrubbed about. the company. All I've been reading from. the reporting is that there was digital. content that might have been deleted. Is. that obstruction under Brazilian law? >> It's obstruction if they deleted. something from the. actual jump, from Maria Eduarda's jump.

>> Mhm. Is it also possible that they want. to arrest these individuals and charge. and potentially charge these individuals. so that they could testify against the. other three instructors? >> Informally, yes. >> Is there something in Brazilian law. where they would get immunity to. testify? >> There is this institute that could grant. you immunity if you testify in some. crimes, but it doesn't apply here. >> Mhm. Mhm. I just want to back up cuz.

it's a little confusing. When I read the. reporting on this, um go back to the charges that the three. are facing. They still say homicide with. eventual intent, homicide with eventual. malice. But the theory from the. prosecution you're saying is it's going. to be with intent that they. deliberately, intentionally killed her. or that they were so reckless, they were. disregarded the risk that that's the. intent. I just want to clarify about the. three people who have been charged. What. exactly do you think the theory of the. case is going to be from the.

prosecution? >> The theory is not that they were so. reckless that. they. they didn't mind, but they didn't care. if she lived or died. That's going to to. be a hard thing to prove because the. statement so far say that they really. didn't know she didn't have a rope. >> What do you make of what the defense has. been saying so far at least in the media. that they're experienced, they blacked.

out, they didn't know what was going on, they're in shock, they've done these. jumps before, they don't know who was. responsible for securing her. Those are. some of the initial statements we're. seeing from, I believe, defense lawyers. that are associated with the case. >> Here's what I make of this. The last. time you asked me about the regulation. of this activity, and. mistakenly I said that rope jumping and. bungee jumping were not regulated. That.

was wrong. Bungee jumping is regulated, officially regulated in Brazil, but rope. jumping isn't. But the tricky part is. the fact that it is not regulated. doesn't mean it's prohibited. So, there's no actual regulation to to say. who is responsible for what, how this. could have done, which are the. equipments, who's responsible, who's. not. And when it comes to a criminal. case, as I said, you have to be able to. point out exactly who did what. And if.

this activity is so unregulated that. even if there were no statements, you. wouldn't be able to point out who was. responsible for what. In their statements, you're not going to. find it because they don't know. >> Uh. >> And they can't know. There's no. regulation. >> So, let me ask you about that. I was. reading, according to uh Bate o Sino da. Sias, Evandro Shoots, who's this. technical manager of the Brazilian. Association of the Ecotourism and. Adventure Tourism companies, basically.

said that Brazil has requirements for. these kinds of activities that we're. talking about, these adventurous. activities. He said in an interview with. SBT News, quote, "Brazil is a world. reference in technical standardization. for adventure tourism activities. We. have 51 technical standards, a very. pertinent legislation to the realization. of commercial leisure and adventure. activities." But he highlighted how. there are specific rules regarding. communication, safety equipment, the. skills of the professionals. And he. warned that episodes like what we're.

seeing here on this skeleton bridge, that it's still going on, saying, quote, "It's not an exclusive case. This. happens every weekend in Brazil. illegally and irregularly." So it does. become a question, I think, who is. responsible here? If they really didn't. have authorization to be doing these um. these jumps. I mean, is it the government's fault? Are police cracking down on other. organizations, particularly after this. event?

>> In my point of view, in my personal. point of view, everybody involved is. responsible for this. When it comes to. the bridge itself, the bridge was built. to be path for train line. That was a. national train line that actually never. crossed that bridge. The train never. never came. So that bridge was useless. for many, many years. And these. activities were happening here for many, many years. And nothing was done to stop. this. They put signs up in one side, but.

the people were coming in through. private properties that were close to. the bridge. So they didn't even see a. sign. They just knew that there was a. bridge and they had to get there. somehow. And the bridge itself belongs. to the federal government, but the city. halls from the two towns involved also. share responsibility on this. They had. to put signs, they had to make sure that. they prevent people from accessing this. bridge because it has been known that.

this was a dangerous place for many many. years. After this all happened, the. federal government is compromised to. implode the bridge. They're going to. demolish it, and the cities involved is. going to put access to prevent people. from accessing this bridge from either. sides while that doesn't happen. But. this happened now, this should have. happened a long time before, and it also. um. in spite of all that, rope jumping is. not exactly a new activity. It didn't.

begin to happen yesterday. So, if it. wasn't going to be absolutely. prohibited, they should have been. regulated a long time ago. >> Doesn't it seem to you, if they're going. to be demolishing this bridge after this. happens, and it the idea is that it. would take something like this for the. bridge to be demolished, but doesn't. that signify to you that the government. is acknowledging liability? Is that the. government saying, "We should have. demolished it. There was a problem, we.

didn't acknowledge it, we didn't do. this." Does it indicate to you that. every allegation this bridge was a. danger is true? But the other argument. in this is maybe it looks so bad what's. happening, they have no choice but to. demolish it. It's really the. responsibility of the defendants right. now. They're the ones who are. responsible for this, whether it. happened in a bridge or somewhere else. But I am curious your thoughts on this. that if they're going to be demolishing. the bridge, doesn't it seem that the. government is acknowledging we were in. the wrong? >> 100% 100%.

>> Okay. Um let me ask you this before we wrap. things up. What happens next with the criminal. case? So, you have the criminal case for. the three instructors. What happens next. in the process? And B, for the three. people that were just arrested, when is. the latest you can file charges against. them? >> When they're arrested, the investigation. has 45 days to conclude, which could be. prorogated for 45 more days. But other.

than that, if you don't have an. indictment until then, they have to walk. free until the judgment. >> for the three people that have already. been charged, what happens to them next? >> They're going to await for the other. charges to run because this is a case. with a victim and you you can't have two. trials for one case. If you have more. than one person involved, you have to. try everybody together. So, that one depends on this. >> Okay. Oh, I see. There's no separate.

trials. So, it could potentially be six. people on trial together. >> Yes. I had one before where there was 30. people. No, so whole 30 people on one. trial. >> Wow. Sounds complicated. >> It is. >> Yeah. You came on and I asked you. what's been the reaction to this story. And while there is sadness and there is. heartbreak, you mentioned that a lot of. people online, unfortunately, are. commenting more on Maria Eduarda's body.

and her appearance than anything, which. is pretty disgusting to say the least. >> Yes. >> What is the latest you can tell us. there? >> The latest I can tell is that the people. who made those disgusting comments about. her body in the morgue and how. it was going to to go down, they're. being investigated. We had two. congresswomen who went to the. prosecution and asked for these people. to be investigated regarding their. comments. >> They could be charged with a crime? >> Yes. >> What's the crime that they could be.

charged with? >> I don't know the exact translation, but. it is inciting to do something vicious. with a body. >> Okay. And I apologize because here in. the United States, we have First. Amendment protections. People say. disgusting things all the time and they. have a right to unless it crosses the. line legally, unless it it's a threat, unless it's harassment, unless it's. defamation, unless it's inciting. somebody or encouraging somebody to. commit a real crime. Do you have that.

kind of protection in Brazil? Like a. First Amendment freedom of speech? >> We do, but it's a lot more limited than. the United States. It's a lot more limited. You can be. very easily. responsible for a crime. You can You can. be charged with a crime very easily. >> Wow. Okay. That's a separate component. we're going to follow too. All right. Thank you for letting us know. Really. good seeing you and I appreciate you. telling us [music] what's happening over. there.

>> Thank you, Jesse. >> And that's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so. much for joining us and as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple. Podcasts, Spotify, wherever [music] you. get your podcast. You can also check us. out on NBC's Peacock as well. If you. want to follow me, X, Instagram, my. NewsNation show, Jesse Weber Live, Monday through Friday, 11:00 [music]. p.m. Eastern. See you next time, everybody.