Elisa Mouliaá no-shows for third time in defamation case brought by Íñigo Errejón, risking arrest
The actress failed to appear in Madrid on Monday, citing work in the Red Sea area with no connectivity. The judge had warned her absence could lead to detention.
The missed appearances
Elisa Mouliaá, the actress who accused former Sumar spokesman Íñigo Errejón of sexual assault in 2024, failed to attend a scheduled court hearing on Monday for the third time. The hearing is part of a criminal defamation case Errejón brought against her after she claimed on television that he had extorted two witnesses in the separate sexual assault investigation.
Judge Arturo Zamarriego had summoned Mouliaá to testify as a defendant at Madrid’s Court of Instruction No. 9. When she did not appear, her lawyer Yurena Carrillo was present and argued that she was abroad under a professional contract running from 8 June through late summer, moving between Dubai and areas of the Red Sea with “limited or non-existent communications.”
We had asked the judge on Friday whether she could testify by videoconference, and he didn’t even respond. He didn’t consider it.
Escalating legal pressure
The judge had already sent a forensic doctor to Mouliaá’s home after she missed a prior hearing citing anxiety-related medical leave. The forensic report concluded she had “adequate capacity to testify.” In the summons for 15 June, Zamarriego explicitly warned that her failure to appear could lead to “her arrest and transfer to the court” and that the incident might be examined as a possible crime of disobedience to the judicial authority.
On Friday, the judge also rejected Mouliaá’s motion to recuse him, describing it as “constructed artificially” and part of a strategy to avoid giving testimony. Her lawyer had appealed the coercive measures to the Madrid Provincial Court, arguing they were disproportionate and constituted institutional mistreatment and revictimisation.
The reasons invoked respond to artificial constructions with no support in the law.
Mouliaá’s position
In a social-media post on Sunday, Mouliaá stated she had documented her work situation for the court and that she would try to appear by videoconference if technically feasible. She later told a television programme that she had been working since 8 June on an international contract, adding that her shop in Spain had been attacked and she was “fighting for my life while they pursue me for reporting a depraved individual.”
Every day we resemble a banana republic more. I have a clear conscience.
She also drew a comparison with another high-profile legal case, saying: “If I have to be detained, then let them detain Begoña Gómez too. Same guarantees for everyone.”
Reactions
Legal commentator Bea de Vicente, speaking on LaSexta, called the repeated non-appearance a “mocking” of the court. She argued that if Mouliaá genuinely could not attend, she should have formally requested a postponement with documentation, not a vague promise to try to connect. De Vicente warned that the judge might order her arrest solely to compel her testimony.
This is a judicial summons, and if you’re going to be away you file a brief, you provide documented proof and you ask for a postponement. Not a ‘look, I’ll see if I can maybe connect.’
Wider context
The defamation case stems from remarks Mouliaá made after Errejón was accused of sexual assault. He resigned all political posts on 24 October 2024, the day anonymous accusations of sexist violence emerged. That same day Mouliaá went public with her own allegation and filed a police complaint. The sexual assault case continues, and another judge, Adolfo Carretero, has already issued an order opening an oral trial against Errejón. Mouliaá’s defence maintains she should not be forced to coincide with her alleged aggressor, arguing that doing so would be a form of institutional violence.
