Merits trial begins for Jet Set nightclub tragedy
The Public Prosecutor’s Office opened the trial this Friday against siblings Antonio and Maribel Espaillat, owners of the Jet Set nightclub, following the tragic collapse of the establishment’s roof that claimed the lives of 236 people and left more than a hundred injured in April 2025.
The presentation of the arguments was led by Deputy Prosecutor Wilson Camacho, Director General of Prosecution, who was emphatic in pointing out that the collapse of the structure was not a fortuitous accident, but the direct result of negligent management.
The weight of negligence was greater than the capacity of the Jet Set’s roof. This is a phrase that, in addition to allowing us to explain this case, we beg the court to keep in mind, because what will happen in this process will be within the geography to which this phrase refers.
Wilson Camacho, General Director of Prosecution of the Public Ministry
Arguments of the Public Prosecutor’s Office
During his statement before the Fourth Chamber of the Criminal Court of the Court of First Instance of the National District, Camacho described the history of the entertainment venue, highlighting that, although it was a benchmark for entertainment for decades, it was also a focus of conflict due to the noise pollution that affected the community.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office maintains that the defendants carried out deficient interventions on the premises’ structure. According to the indictment, the repairs made were superficial and inadequate, ignoring the building’s actual safety needs and turning the space into a constant source of danger for attendees.
Judicial process details
- Charges: The Espaillat brothers face formal charges for involuntary manslaughter.
- Tragedy: The collapse occurred in the early hours of April 8, 2025, during a performance by merengue artist Rubby Pérez.
- Current stage: The court is in the phase of presenting arguments, to subsequently proceed with the evaluation of testimonial, documentary, and expert evidence.
This trial represents one of the most significant and sensitive judicial processes in the recent history of the Dominican Republic, given the magnitude of the human loss and the gravity of the accusations regarding the lack of structural maintenance in a high-traffic venue.
