The Supreme Court has confirmed a sentence of twelve years of prison for a young man who in 2016 violated at the point of a knife to a worker of a museum of the town tenerife Puerto de Santiago. The victim, who was cleaning the bathrooms when it was attacked, told the court how his attacker said, “just out of prison, so you need to be with a woman.”
The facts, according to the judgment which he has had access to the String to BE, took place in September 2016 in the Fisherman’s museum of Puerto Santiago, Santiago del Teide. The defendant, who was then 22 years old and already had a criminal record, assaulted at the point of a knife her victim that she had just started her day’s work, and in that time he cleaned the bathrooms of the building. After the sexual assault the defendant in addition to he stole the phone mobile phone to your victim before fleeing the place.
Throughout the judicial process the victim he maintained his version and specified that the defendant rejected her bag when she offered it, saying, “what you want is sex and that just got out of prison, so that you need to be with a woman“. Before leaving the museum “asked for forgiveness” to the woman, what Justice considers it “a humiliation, not of repentance.”
The Supreme Court, with Julián Sánchez Melgar as a speaker, just to confirm the sentence imposed at first, the Audiencia Provincial of Santa Cruz de Tenerife: twelve years of prison for an offence of sexual assault and a fine of 90 euros for one minor shoplifting, in addition to the obligation to indemnify with 30,000 euros his victim and pay the price of the phone you stole it “with the intention of unlawful enrichment”.
Repair of the damage
The various judgments in this case reflect how the rapist asked to be taken into account as a mitigating factor repair of the damage the fact of having asked for “forgiveness” to the victim after perpetrating the violation. The judges of the Provincial court rejected this possibility in the first instance, recalling that, in the judgment, the defendant not only was not repented nor apologized for their actions, but that it was felt, to him, the victim of an unfounded allegation, stating that this woman had shattered his mental capabilities”.
The defendant went on to deny the facts to recognize that he had maintained a relationship with the woman, even if consensual, while the victim’s statement “has always been consistentwithout ambiguities or fable” as reminiscent of the Supreme Court. The remains of DNA analyzed by the Guardia Civil in the scene of the crime also were the keyexplains the sentence, to identify the young person as perpetrator of the violation.