This is not a question to answer, is just the difference description of Froilan’s accident given by diverse newspapers.

As we all know, Felipe Juan Froilán de Todos los Santos de Marichalar y Borbón, known as Froilán, is the 13 years old son of Elena de Borbón and Jaime de Marichalar. Obviously, due to his age, he has starred some antics and huffs.

The last one led him to gun shot himself. He received a bullet on his foot from a short distance, while he was “practicing” with his father Jaime de Marichalar.The point is, whose is to blame for this accident? The naughty innocent kid? Or the irresponsible father?

This is a clear example of an irresponsibility act. The fact of having your 13 years old children playing, or as you say “practicing” with weapons (in this case a firearm) is not proper of a normal education. So the one who has to be judged (in the sense of being evaluated) is the father. Here comes the role of the Press and the audience.

Reading two distinct newspapers I’ve found that casually, the one who is closer to the Royal House and the “extreme” right-wing parties, don’t demand and question the fact of Marichalar teaching how to shoot to his young son. With beautiful words and unnecessary stories they complete an article where they don’t claim why the hell is a 13 years old boy playing with gun shots.

They know how to divert the attention of the audience by saying that Froilán has a special character or telling that he is on vacation, but they don’t say anything about a child using a weapon that  is not allowed to use.

To top his bad report, they (La Razón Newspaper) they have disabled the comments on the new, because they know that people will reply on their coverage. So we can’t comment on their focusing. A way of censor our opinions.

Luckily I could found another point of view of the new, with other focusing and goal. This time written by El País newspaper. In this report they “criticize” the act by the Royal Family members and specially they make the point on the legality of the success. There is a law which prohibits to use a gun shot if you are less than 14. So here is an infringement that should be punished, as any other infringement would be.

From my point of view, apart of the health of Froilán, what is important is to judge the action of an under 14 boy using a gun. But in this case, because of his social position and name (of the Father, Jaime de Marichalar), that point is being kind of unnoticed by some people. But thanks to the report by El País we have a useful graphic that shows the crime committed.

Here are the links of the same new given by the different sources.

  • El País on Froilán’s accident:

  • La Razón on Froilán’s accident: