The Supreme does not see sexual assault and yes abuse in a consensual relationship with a minor

The

has reduced from 12 to 8 years the sentence of a man for sexually abusing a minor in a municipality in

by qualifying the events as abuse and not as sexual assault because the magistrates

, but that the relationship was consensual.

The Criminal Chamber has issued a sentence that partially estimates the appeal of the convicted person against the resolution of

that ratified that of the Valencia Court for a crime of sexual assault, but that now the high court reduces to abuse sexual.

The Spanish legal system sets the age of sexual consent at 16 years, but in this case the minor was only 14 years old, with which the accused committed a crime of abuse.

that Congress approved this Thursday and that will now be processed in the Senate eliminates the difference between both types of crimes, so that in the future this type of behavior will be punished as sexual assault.

The events occurred in the early hours of February 23, 2020. The convicted person, who was then

, entered the room where the minor was with a friend and after asking him to leave, he closed the door by placing a chair to prevent access from abroad and had sexual relations with the young woman.

The sentence says that the convicted

, so the mitigating factor of drunkenness is applied.

In his appeal, the convicted person defends that he

, although the lower court ruling indicates that the defendant used violence and intimidation to force her to maintain that relationship.

And the

indicates that it has detected "some fissure in the evaluation process of the evidence" carried out by the judgment of the Court and the TSJV and that it could have been fundamental, due to its eventual relevance, to the point of giving rise to a pronouncement different and more favorable to the accused.

For example, it cites that a civil guard stated that

which another of the agents reiterated, a reaction that does not seem to fit very well with the situation that a 14-year-old girl is suffering. to whose rescue the police come because he is being attacked.

The magistrates detected another omission in the sentence when a friend stated, referring to the victim, that "she

, but..., that is, she was kissing one but kissed both".

If it turns out that those two boys are the same ones who went with her to the apartment where the events take place, it seems more compatible with this that the relationship that she had with any of them was consensual, the magistrates specify.

The Supreme Court says that with "the absolute omission of the previous elements of discharge", the High Court and the TSJ "have stopped addressing the appellant's relevant allegations."

It adds that

in regard to proving that there was some type of force or intimidation by the convicted person in the sexual relationship he had with the minor, so that the evidence carried out as far as it allows to go is that the convicted person had a consensual sexual relationship with the minor, and these facts constitute a crime of sexual abuse.

The Supreme Court not only reduces the prison sentence, but

, that of special disqualification for any profession or trade that involves regular and direct contact with minors and the probation, although it maintains compensation to the victim of 20,000 euros.

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria

Know more

• supreme court

• sexual abuse

• sexual assaults