11/25/2021 at 08:31 CET
A businessman from Mislata, owner of a tobacconist and furniture company, who initially faced a sentence of 27 years in prison for rape a trainee, has been acquitted by the Fourth Section of the Provincial Court when the magistrates consider that the account made by the victim does not distort the principle of presumption of innocence. The rapporteur of the sentence goes further and even includes as a proven fact that the woman denounced the three sexual assaults because she was “disappointed not to be hired”.
With a notorious lack of tact in the treatment of the victim of a crime against sexual freedom, the Chamber questions that the woman did not cut off her employment relationship with the defendant before the third of the reported sexual assaults and “put herself at risk of being attacked“Without taking into account that the tobacconist was pressuring her to obtain sexual favors by taking advantage of the victim’s employment situation, who needed him to validate her job placement practices to renew her residence permit in Spain.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office does not share the criteria of the court and does believe that the woman was a victim of the events she relates, which occurred in Mislata between May and July 2019. However, as Levante-EMV has learned, the Prosecutor’s Office is not going to appeal the ruling of the Provincial Court since it is an evaluation of the evidence, which the court has already carried out, and except in cases in which inconsistencies are found in the argumentation of the sentence, it cannot be evaluated by another external court to the practice of the test celebrated in the trial.
During the oral hearing the victim did not provide strong and persistent testimony with her previous statements, at the discretion of the Chamber, which details in her sentence that the woman “offers as many versions as she has told the events that she says happened.” By not being able to specify the exact day on which the three episodes she recounts occurred and due to variations in the place in which she places some of them, as well as details such as whether she was forced to undress or not, the court has generated you doubt his testimony.
Based on these doubts, the sentence considers that “sufficient evidence has not been practiced in the act of the trial to overcome the constitutional principle of innocence” of the accused. Of course, at no time has testimony been deduced against the victim, because one thing is that he does not consider it strong enough in his manifestations and the other is that they take the step of accusing her of lying.
In fact, the sentence omits to speak of the testimony of the woman’s daughter, who did confirm her mother’s version —According to what he told him in his day—, and thus supposes a peripheral element of reference that corroborates the state that the abuse or sexual assaults caused the victim. Nor does it elaborate on the alleged spurious motive that the complainant may have, beyond reflecting that when asked by the defendant’s defense, she ended up acknowledging her disappointment at not having been hired, as he had promised. Fact that does not remove so that the blowjobs and abuses with carnal access that she relates are not real.
In fact, although no violence or threats had been used to subjugate the sexual consent of the victim, it would be possible that the accused had taken advantage of precisely the vulnerability of his employee, whom he had in the tobacconist performing an internship. simulated to complete an integration course for foreign citizens, to subject her to said sexual practices.
The prosecution lowered the initial penalty
The Prosecutor’s Office initially requested a 27-year prison sentence for the accused, nine years for each of the three crimes of sexual assault, although in light of the variations in the report of the complainant during the trial, with respect to her previous statements, she modified the petition to seven years in prison for a continuing crime of sexual assault. More because of the imprecision of the concrete facts, which would constitute a crime that continues over time and not three different episodes of rape with their own entity.
The victim has also not benefited from the fact that when he reported the sexual assaults, on August 6, 2019 – a week after the last episode in which he forced her to perform fellatio – he also reported an alleged scam, which is still in a separate process. The woman says that the 30,000 euros that the now acquitted deposited in his account was the money with which he tried to buy his silence.