Actress Elisa Mouliaá will have to appear on June 15 for the complaint that former deputy Íñigo Errejón filed against her, considering that she had publicly accused him of manipulating his witnesses in the case investigating the former Sumar leader for sexual abuse. If she does not appear, she will be arrested. As reported by Cadena SER and confirmed by this newspaper, Judge Arturo Zamarriego has been very clear after the artist missed two previous summonses.
The head of the Madrid Court of Instruction Number 9 explains that he has made this decision after receiving a forensic medical report stating that Mouliaá “has adequate capacity to testify.” This overcomes the argument the actress had made — medical leave due to anxiety — to justify her absence on previous occasions. “Summon her in legal form with the express warning that, if she does not appear at this third call, her arrest and transfer to this court may be ordered, with testimony deduction in case the facts constitute a crime of disobedience to authority,” the judge emphasizes in his order dated Thursday.
Mouliaá’s defense, now handled by lawyer Yurena Carrillo, has filed an appeal against this decision, considering the measure “disproportionate.” In the document, accessed by EL PAÍS, the lawyer stresses that the artist’s interrogation can “be satisfied through equally valid and guaranteed alternative mechanisms,” such as a videoconference or a notarial record. However, she reveals that the actress has already decided to exercise her right not to testify.
Given this, the lawyer argues that the law does not require Mouliaá to personally attend court to confirm her decision to remain silent. In her view, the judge’s insistence that the actress appear in court “lacks effective material utility from the moment this party has formally anticipated that she will exercise her constitutional right to silence.” “The in-person appearance is thus reduced to a mere formality lacking real necessity,” she insists.
In this regard, the defense asks the judge to consider “the context of extraordinary media exposure” accompanying this procedure: a complaint filed by Errejón at the end of 2025 for alleged defamation and slander within another equally high-profile procedure, the accusation she makes against the former deputy for alleged sexual assault in 2021. For the lawyer, this exposure represents a “serious potential impact on Mouliaá’s fundamental rights,” particularly her privacy, dignity, image, and presumption of innocence.
Thus, she reiterates that “the requirement of physical presence in court, under threat of arrest, is particularly burdensome and unnecessary in this context.” Nevertheless, she emphasizes that she has no intention of obstructing justice and is willing to “cooperate.”
The actress denies slander and says she acted in “self-defense”
Within this procedure, the judge has already taken testimony from a witness and from Errejón himself. The former deputy’s complaint is based on messages Mouliaá posted on her social networks claiming that he had manipulated some witnesses and former friends of hers to testify in his favor in the sexual assault case. This couple lived in the Madrid apartment where the October 2021 party took place, where the events reported by Mouliaá allegedly occurred. Both testified in court via videoconference from Australia, where they reside, and stated that they saw “nothing unusual” that night.
The message in question, posted by the actress on June 21, 2025, on the social network X said that Errejón had refused to hand over his phone “because he had extorted” two of his witnesses. “Don’t invent reality,” she added. Errejón considers that “slanderous expressions” were used in that post and that he was “falsely” accused of having “extorted” two people.
In her appeal, Mouliaá’s defense argues that these statements were made “in a context of reputational self-defense and reaction to a situation of intense public and media exposure, also linked to her personal perception of the events experienced and suffered.” Therefore, she considers that continuing with the defamation case — which she describes as “coercive proceedings lacking real utility” — together with the judge’s warning of arrest if she does not appear, is “incompatible with the principles of proportionality, procedural good faith, and minimal penal intervention.”
Apart from this procedure, Errejón and Mouliaá are awaiting the Provincial Court of Madrid’s ruling on the appeal filed by the former deputy against the decision of the head of the Court of Instruction Number 47 of the capital, Judge Alfonso Carretero, to order the opening of a trial for sexual abuse. The prosecution requests the acquittal of the former Sumar spokesperson in that case, considering that there was consent in the reported events and that “the sexual encounter” ended when the actress “stated that she did not want to continue.”
Read more A narco speedboat crashes into a Customs patrol boat during a chase in Almería