She was found guilty by a Seville court Ten and a half years imprisonment for a man, for committing a continuous crime of sexual assault against his partner’s younger sister Emotionally, when she was between 12 and 16 years old … Of age.
In this judgment of October 30, which this newspaper has seen, the First Division of the Court of Seville declares that the accused, Manuel M. N., who is 39 years old today, He had begun a romantic relationship with a woman in 2013.in a context in which he was living a family life with her, with his parents and with his younger sister, who was about to turn 13 and with whom he began to form a “close” bond and “gain her trust.”
The accused, according to the conviction, was working in the family business of his partner W She took advantage of the fact that she and her sister “were very close” to spend more time with their youngestwhich was preferred by the fact that it particularly affected the pre-adolescent stage, which was Death of a friend, colleague“As a result, she felt unprotected and out of place.” This was also a result of the alleged harassment he was also subjected to.
“The accused, JShe became aware of the superiority given to a minor at the age of 12 and was mired in depression“He used the situation to appear to the minor as a source of help, as a reference person to whom he could tell his concerns and express everything that affected her,” the sentence notes, detailing that Manuel M. n. “He established a relationship of complete trust with the minor that led to the ability to initiate a gradual physical approach, with kisses, hugs, and physical contact with the minor.”
The court’s ruling stated, “The frequency of these communications increased over time and their intensity also increased, as the accused began touching the minor’s genital area under her clothes or in any possible way in appropriate situations when he felt safe from the eyes or eyes of those around him.” Adding that when the victim was 13 years old, the accused had a full sexual relationship with her, which “was repeated over time during 2013.” In the following years, repeatedly and anywhere in the home if the opportunity arises to be alone with the minor.
“Satisfying the accused’s sexual desire The minor’s silence, acquired through the dominance he achieved over her, became a support and a source of help in her case of weakness, in addition to the advantage provided by the noticeable age difference. “And maturity,” the court explains, how the defendant “came to her and made her see that he was the only one who loved her and the person who understood her best.”
The court also stated that even when the minor was 16 years old in September 2016, the romantic relationship between the accused and the victim’s sister ended; He “continued to work in the family’s nursery, and sexual encounters continued” with the victim, although less frequently.He finally revealed the facts to a teacher and educational counselor at the institute where he was studying, and that “the accused’s work relationship in the family company was cut off.”
The first part of the session agrees in its ruling with the Public Prosecution and the special charge practiced on behalf of the victim regarding the fact that The “most appropriate criminal code” for the accused in this case is 10/2022 or “yes just means yes.”“Which sets a minimum (prison sentence) of six years, in contrast to previous and subsequent laws that set a minimum of eight years.”
And let us remember that the initial controversial formulation of the aforementioned law was driven by More than a thousand reductions in sentences for sexual crimesDue to the unification of the crimes of harm and assault into one type, and the rule that in the event of a collision between two criminal rules that differ in temporal validity, the punishment that is most appropriate for the offender should be applied.
The court also recalls this “The highly refined jurisprudential and constitutional principle allows the declaration of the victim to be considered sufficient evidence to distort the aforementioned fundamental right (presumption of innocence).” When the matter is of such magnitude that it undeniably leads to a firm conviction that his account is consistent with the reality of the facts,” which the accused in this case denied.
According to the court, “the victim’s testimony, as the only evidence for the prosecution, supports the version of the proven facts as they are.” Credible and supported by other evidence, at the expense of the credibility and sincerity of the accused’s statements.
For this reason, the First District Court declared him guiltyNine and a half years in prison for a continuing sexual assault offense With physical access and penetration of a minor under the age of 16, it also imposed a 15-year ban on approaching or communicating with the victim and an obligation to compensate the victim in the amount of 20 thousand euros.