The Supreme Court maintains 11 years in prison for a soldier who abused a girl after reviewing the sentence for the "only yes is yes"

But the sentence is reduced by 9 months considering exhibitionism and sexual provocation as a single continuous crime

MADRID, 5 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The Supreme Court (TS) has decided to maintain the sentence of 11 years in prison imposed on a soldier who abused an 11-year-old girl, considering that it is proportional to the crime committed, after reviewing it in light of what is known as 'law of only yes is yes', although it has reduced 9 months of the sentence to more than 18 years that he received for other sexual crimes committed against this minor and another when seeing exhibitionism and sexual provocation as a single continuous crime.

In a sentence of January 19, to which Europa Press has had access, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court partially upholds the appeal filed by the military against the sentence handed down on June 14 by the Superior Court of Justice de Madrid (TSJM) that sentenced him to 18 years, one month and one day in jail for a crime of sexual abuse against one of the girls and crimes of corruption of minors, sexual provocation and exhibitionism against both.

The facts date back to 2017 when the man, who worked as a physical trainer at a tennis club, approached two of his students. In the case of one of them, he did it "taking advantage of the closeness and friendship" that united him with his father, a childhood friend.

He established "practically daily" contact with the girls through WhatsApp and in the course of these conversations, "guided by the specific intention of satisfying his lascivious mood, he earned the full trust and admiration" of the minors, whom " he recounted his daily chores as a professional soldier" and entertained them "with presents and the way he addressed" them, calling them "princess" or "heart".

The talks ended up having a sexual content. Among other things, he told them that he "wouldn't mind having sex" with them and later "started showing them videos with explicit sexual content" in which he appeared having sex with his wife.

He also sent them nude photos of himself and convinced the 11-year-old to send him pictures. On one occasion, this exchange of photos took place while he was stationed at a Spanish military base in Iraq.

In the case of this minor, he was naked and masturbated in front of her. And one day, when they were both in his house, with his wife in another room and their 6-year-old son in the same room as the two of them, while they were watching a movie at night, he finally abused the minor.

The ruling, a presentation by Judge Carmen Lamela, explains that due to the entry into force of the "only yes is yes" law, on October 7, she was given the opportunity to claim what she considered appropriate but not He did so, so the Supreme Court proceeded to review the sentence handed down ex officio.

The Second Chamber focuses on the crime affected by the penal reform, that of sexual abuse, for which he received 11 years in prison, recalling that the previous Penal Code punished him with between 10 and 12 years in prison, while now the Penalty frame is between 9 and 12.

"For this reason, the most beneficial legislation for the appellant is the one currently in force," he indicates, but adds that the same 11-year sentence can be imposed with the 'law of only yes is yes', for which reason he maintains it.

The magistrates emphasize that the TSJ made "a detailed analysis of the proportionality of the sentence imposed that is transferable to this moment." "The sentence imposed can be imposed today after the reform and meets the requirements of proportionality," they settle.

However, they partially agree with the military and eliminate the sentence of 9 months and one day in prison that he received for a continuous crime of exhibitionism against the minor he abused, which leaves the sentence at 17 years and 4 months in prison. .

The Supreme Court points out that, "according to the proven factual account, it can be verified that the acts of exhibitionism carried out by the accused before the minor and the exhibition of videos in which he appeared having sexual relations with his wife constituted in both cases acts of sexual provocation that must be integrated into a single continuous crime of sexual provocation".

"Consequently with this, the appeal must be partially upheld in the sense that the continued crime of exhibitionism and the continued crime of sexual provocation (...) must be integrated into a single continuous crime of exhibitionism and sexual provocation," he concludes.