A total of 107 judges of violence against women courts have signed a statement in which they show their “strong rejection” of the “personalized attack” that, according to their complaint, the judge of the Violence Against Women Court has suffered. number 2 of Granada by the Juana Rivas team of lawyers.
“A personalized attack on the companion, which far exceeds an alleged exercise of the right of defense,” says the statement from the judges, who attribute it to an attempt to start a media campaign to question “any judicial decision” to the contrary. to the interests of Rivas. Something that, they warn, undermines the confidence of potential victims in justice.
The Grenadine’s lawyers this morning assessed the judge’s decision to recuse herself from the case in which Juana Rivas asks that her son stay in Spain with her, thus avoiding making a decision. The assessment note from Aránguez Abogados, signed by Carlos Aránguez, began by pointing out to the judge: “Keep this name: Aurora Angulo.”
Next, the lawyer recalled that this judge had already intervened in the case by filing Rivas’s first complaint against Francesco Arcuri, in 2016. Something that, in his opinion, “flagrantly” failed to comply with article 17 of the Victim’s Statute, which required translate the complaint and send it to Italy, something that was not done until a year later.
“The mistake of Judge Aurora Angulo begins what we now call the “Juana Rivas Case,” said the lawyers, who linked this background with the order known today, in which it is considered that the events now reported by the youngest son of Arcuri and Rivas do not imply gender violence. The lawyers consider it a “very serious fact” that a judge specialized in gender violence “does not understand what vicarious violence is, which consists of harming or controlling children to make the mother suffer.” Not seeing signs of gender violence, the judge refuses to take on the case, although she urges that proceedings be opened for a possible crime of domestic violence against the son, in another court.
In a subsequent statement, Aránguez says he is aware that in his first note “very negative evaluations are made of some resolutions issued in 2016 and 2025 by Judge Aurora Angulo” and assumes the “disciplinary, criminal or civil” responsibility in which there was could incur. At the same time, it warns that it reserves legal actions, such as a possible claim for financial liability for the abnormal functioning of the Administration of Justice.
A “media campaign” to stigmatize decisions contrary to Juana Rivas
The corporate response of the judges specialized in sexist violence glimpses in the lawyers’ statement a “media campaign aimed at stigmatizing any judicial decision that may be contrary to the interests of Ms. Rivas”, with the addition that it is directed “in a frontal and direct manner” against Judge Angulo.
“We consider that this type of action not only seeks to directly discredit the colleague against whom the attack is directed, but in general, against all those who run Courts of Violence against Women, with respect to whom it is intended to generate doubts about their capacity and professional qualifications,” the statement warns.
The objective would be to “subject to public scrutiny” “strictly legal issues that become debated in television, radio, and social media gatherings, with opinions of all kinds, and that often border on frivolity,” to the detriment of the fight against violence. gender and the protection of minors.
The magistrates highlight their involvement in the fight against sexist and vicarious violence, and show “concern and rejection of this type of media campaigns”, which would have the capacity to cause a “deterrent effect” by undermining the confidence of many women in the system. . “When a colleague is discredited for her professional performance in a specific case that is the subject of enormous media attention, the entire judicial system is ultimately discredited.”
#judges #violence #women #reject #attack #Juana #Rivass #lawyers #judge #inhibited
