It maintains the sentences for three other convicts considering that the reform is not more beneficial for them
MADRID, 15 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Supreme Court (TS) has agreed to apply two new reductions in sentences to those convicted of sexual crimes because the ‘only yes is yes’ law is more beneficial for them; In one of the cases, the sentence has been lowered with the endorsement of the Prosecutor’s Office, which –until now– had shown its opposition in the rest of the reviews.
The high court has informed this Wednesday of four new resolutions in which the appeals of cassation presented by the defenses of the convicted are resolved. In two of these cases –one from the Balearic Islands and one from Catalonia–, the magistrates have chosen to maintain the sentences imposed because the penal reform does not favor them; and in two other cases –one from Navarra and the other from La Rioja–, they have agreed to lower them.
Until now, the Supreme Court has deliberated on the appeals filed against 20 sentences. In 11 of them it has agreed to maintain the sentences imposed; and in the other 9, it has deemed it pertinent to reduce the prison sentences for being more favorable to the convicted. Thus, there are already 12 convicts benefited in the high court by the penal reform.
In the case that occurred in Navarra, the Supreme Court has reduced from 16 to 14 years the prison sentence imposed on a man who was convicted of crimes of illegal detention, sexual assault, mistreatment and threats against his ex-partner. The magistrates have applied this modification considering that the Organic Law of Comprehensive Guarantee of Sexual Freedom is more favorable.
The court has only lowered the penalty for the crime of sexual assault with carnal access with the aggravating circumstance of kinship, because after the penal reform the minimum imposed for this type of crime has been affected. It has gone from 9 years and 1 day to 7 years.
The Supreme Court has imposed this new minimum with the support of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which presented a report in which it argued that, “taking into account the grounds of the sentence”, the minimum of 7 years should be applied “since it is more beneficial” this new minimum penalty
The magistrates have stressed that “in reality, we are not dealing with a case of final judgment review, but in the process of appeal.”
As stated in the sentence, collected by Europa Press, the events date back to November 2019, when the man went to his ex-partner’s house to tell him that he would take him to his place of work. When they were both in the vehicle, the woman realized that the condemned man “was not following the proper route.” “Now I’m going to kill you,” the man told him.
He took her to an “isolated spot” and there he raped her. When she finished, she told him: “I’m going to suffocate you.” And she did. She lost consciousness and did not wake up until “late afternoon.” The next morning the woman tried to convince the man to take her back home, “but he flatly refused.” The Civil Guard intercepted the vehicle that night and arrested the man.
Likewise, this Wednesday the Supreme Court has announced that it has agreed to reduce the prison sentence of a man who was convicted in La Rioja of sexually assaulting a woman from 12 to 9 years, after putting a knife to her neck in a field.
As in the case of Navarra, the magistrates have considered that the new wording of the Penal Code is more beneficial for the prisoner. In the sentence, also collected by Europa Press, they have explained that with the law of ‘only yes is yes’ the minimum for the crime of sexual assault is modified, a “logical sequel to the unification of previous abuses with sexual assaults” .
Although the court has lowered the sentence for the crime of sexual assault, it has maintained the sentence of 1 year in prison for a crime of obstruction of justice, so that the new sentence for the two crimes is finally 10 years. prison.
This case dates back to October 2019, when the defendant stayed with the victim and took her to a field, “where they both consumed speed.” He offered the woman 50 euros to have sex with him, but she refused. “At this refusal, he took a knife from her” and put it to her neck to then rape her.
According to the resolution, the man told her that “if she told anything about what he had done to her, he would kill her.” That same day, she went to the Civil Guard headquarters and denounced the attack. He then threatened to kill her if he did not withdraw the complaint from her.
On the sidelines, the magistrates have studied two other appeals presented by the defenses of three convicted of sexual crimes -two in the Balearic Islands and one in Catalonia-. In both cases they have agreed to maintain the sentences because the new wording of the Penal Code is not more beneficial to them.
Specifically, the Supreme Court has deemed it appropriate to maintain the sentences for the crime of sexual assault in competition with a crime of qualified injuries imposed by the Superior Court of Justice of the Balearic Islands on two men who, in March 2016, raped a woman who was then practicing prostitution and whose services they had contracted in Palma de Mallorca.
The court has confirmed 14 years in prison for one of them and 12 and a half years for the other. As he has explained, there is no benefit for them derived from the entry into force of the new law for an ideal competition case of the crime of sexual assault with injuries such as the one that occurred.
Regarding the case of Catalonia, the Supreme Court has also ruled out applying the new law for not considering it more beneficial for a man who was sentenced to 9 years in prison for a continued crime of sexual assault on a minor under 16 years of age, specifically his stepdaughter since she she was 10 years old and even 12.
The magistrates have agreed to maintain said sentence for this crime, to which is added another 2 years in prison for a crime of violence in the domestic sphere.
