Senator cited court precedent on presumption of paternity when the possible father refuses to take a DNA test during a paternity investigation
After filing a report of rape of a vulnerable person against the federal deputy (PL-AL), senator (Podemos-MS) said that there is no “the duty to prove absolutely nothing”. The statement was made on Sunday night (March 29, 2026) in a post on X (formerly Twitter).
“The paternity investigation in Brazil begins without evidence, obviously! Otherwise, there would be no need to prosecute (!!!). The queen of evidence, in this case, is the DNA test. However, if the alleged father refuses to carry it out, the relative presumption of paternity applies (Precedent 301 STJ)”he wrote.
“Although he is not obliged to provide genetic material, the refusal, added to other evidence, generally results in the declaration of paternity. The burden of proof is, as a rule, on the author, but the refusal inverts this logic by presuming the fact. In these cases, the defendant has the burden of discontinuing the expert evidence or the evidence of paternity presented (CPC, art. 373, II)”, said the senator.
UNDERSTAND
Along with the federal deputy (PT-RJ), Soraya actually presented the news to the Federal Police on Friday (27.mar.2026). The communication involves information about the possible rape of a vulnerable person and Gaspar’s attempt to hide the facts, but does not present evidence. Read the (346-kB).
The congressmen requested confidential processing, preservation of evidence and urgent adoption of PF measures, in addition to full protection of the people involved in the case. In response, the rapporteur of the (Mixed Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry) of the INSS stated that it was a case involving a cousin’s daughter and showed a DNA test that, according to him, confirms that she is not his daughter.
Watch (18min59s):
Farias and Thronicke reported having received documentary records and conversations indicating the practice of rape of a vulnerable person against a girl who was 13 years old at the time of the events. The document does not say what year the crime is suspected of. The congressmen claim to have received reports that, as a result of the violence, the teenager became pregnant and later gave birth to a child.
Prints of conversations and information were sent to the deputy and senator according to which a person acted as an intermediary in negotiations with Gaspar to cover up the case. According to congressmen, the negotiation was worth R$ 470 thousand “with the purpose of preventing the fact from being communicated to the authorities”.
The case came to light during the reading of the INSS CPMI final report, when Lindbergh The CPMI rapporteur, in turn, said that he will.
OTHER SIDE
Gaspar stated that the case exists, but it concerns a cousin with the same name, in Alagoas.
According to Gaspar, two women and a child are involved: daughter, mother and grandmother. The deputy said that the older woman had a daughter with her cousin – who is currently 21 years old and has an 8-year-old daughter. According to Gaspar, the cousin acknowledged paternity and pays support for the child, who is his granddaughter and his daughter at the same time.
The deputy presented a DNA test, denied having children outside of marriage and showed a video of the 21-year-old woman confirming that she was the daughter of Gaspar’s cousin.
Claimed to be Gaspar’s daughter, the woman displays the document and says the father is someone else (1min55s):
Gaspar apologized to the family and stated that he is “with a clear conscience”. Said that “The truth always appears and good always wins”.
“Thank God I don’t have a child out of wedlock, I don’t have a lover, I’ve never had sexual relations in Brasília, not even with my wife because she comes here very little, I come to Congress and return home”, Gaspar said.
The deputy also confirmed that he had joined the Ethics Council against Lindbergh Farias for his statements and classified the situation as a demonstration of desperation related to the INSS CPMI report, the target of criticism from the allied base of the president’s government (PT), which prepared a with the aim of replacing the official opinion that ended up not being voted on.
