«Frankly, it seems to us excessive knitting when messages of WhatsApps taken from context –In them a ‘is not no’ and a ‘we are left alone to speak, “when” the only incriminating evidence that exists is the version of the complainant-controlled in a forceful and credible way for that of the accused-, which results Fewish and contradictory».
They are part of the arguments with which the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice (TSJ) of Castilla y León revokes a sentence issued by the Provincial Court of Soria, which He had sentenced a man to five years in prison For a crime of sexual aggression, in addition to imposing a fine of 35,000 euros and the prohibition of approaching it less than 500 meters for ten years.
The High Court considers that «it must The principle in dubio pro reo prevails»And acquit him from the accusation made by the woman with whom he had a relationship of friendship and” waiter-client “and had maintained a Previous and “consented” sexual encounter before the one that led him to file the complaint and raise the case to trial. The first was on December 23, 2022, in which, according to both the new ruling and lying, She “was unpleasant.”
And it was on January 14, 2023 when the events tried. That day, the defendant wrote to The woman -with reduced mobilitydiagnosed with mild cerebral palsy with wandering at home with the help of cane and precise chair with motor outside, with a recognized physical disability of 79 percent- to go to visit her home. She told him that he could go, “but not to maintain sexual intercourse, but simply to speak».
He went to home, in a town in Soria, and being there they entered the kitchen, where he began to kiss her and proposed to have sex right there. She refused to do it in that room, to which she took her “Caballito” and took her to her bedroom, threw it in bed and withdrew the quilt, as the woman asked her “in order not to stain her.” He removed the rest of the clothes, placed himself and penetrated it, at which time the versions of disagreement in the relationship differ. Views the evidence and testimonies, for the TSJ what happened No houses with a relationship to force and without consentbecause the fact that she was placed “above the alleged aggressor” implies, as the defense lawyer raised, “an active and not merely patient or neutral position.”
«It seems to us that unique negative that verbalized They were clearly aimed at having sex in the kitchen »and then, when he threw it from his house, he considers the court in the recall ruling.
And understands that «there is a clear will of the complainant to meet the accused At home, either stimulated by her as he says, either requested by him, as she manifests; Without the phrases ‘is not’ or ‘just to speak’ that stand out in the WhatsApps, they accredit a rejection of maintaining a sexual relationship or, at least, make us understand that The rejection was not susceptible to fading when with that one ».
Holds the ruling that “the victim’s statementthat it is not an indiciarious evidence but directly, it does not have sufficient virtuality to become the mere fact of its existence in proof of sufficient position against the denounced “, so it must” be submitted to the timely assessment “in relation” with all the subjective and objective factors. “
Thus, the Judgment of the TSJ agrees to revocate the penalty imposed on the accused, with a ruling before which appeals.
#TSJ #WhatsApp #context #revokes #sentence #sexual #aggression
