The defendant accused of raping his stepdaughter for years has denied all charges during the last session of the trial, which was adjourned for sentencing this Thursday. "Obviously she's making it up. I don't know why, that question is for her," he replied when the prosecutor asked him for the third time how he explains that the minor made that accusation against him and has maintained it for years "coherently", both in her statements to the police and in court, and before all the psychologists and forensic doctors who have had to issue reports in this case.
"I know there are forensic reports that incriminate me, but I ask you to take everything into account, because there are many things that don't make sense. All I ask is that you look at everything with a magnifying glass," the defendant said, addressing the court, when using his last turn to speak during the trial. In that intervention, which lasted for about 20 minutes, he tried to highlight all the alleged "contradictions" in the minor's story, who was between 10 and 12 years old when the events occurred and is now 16.
Both he and his lawyer have emphasized that the girl has not been able to specify the exact date on which the abuse began, or that in the different statements she introduced changes in the story and the specific details of how each sexual assault occurred, and in particular the first one.
"The first time is the one that leaves a mark, it should be burned into the minor's mind," the defendant's lawyer has stated, questioning changes in the girl's statement, in aspects such as whether the defendant told her to take off her clothes or he took them off, or if the first time he touched her legs - which the girl said was when they were alone in the car - was on the way there or on the way back. "That story cannot be given credibility," the defense lawyer argued.
In this regard, the prosecutor recalled in his conclusions that all the experts who have testified in the case and who interviewed the girl, as well as the psychologist with whom she is in treatment and who has held 41 meetings with her so far, agree that her story is credible.
"A story is not only credible or not credible. There are more than 15 intermediate categories," he stressed, insisting that in this case the conclusion of the experts is that it is "credible", without any nuance. In addition, in their reports and in their judicial statement, three psychologists insisted that it is precisely a "rigid" story, which does not undergo changes, that may offer doubts about its veracity, and pointed out that the normal thing, especially in a child who has suffered abuse and sexual violence, is that they forget certain details, "as a defense mechanism".
"They have made me look like a monster"
"They have made me look like a monster here. I have had to listen to barbarities about myself," the defendant added in his final plea. Shortly before, when his lawyer was presenting his final conclusions, he began to cry, and this is how he began his intervention when using his last turn to speak.
"Today I am anxious, without pills and without anything", he pointed out, referring to one of the episodes that have been highlighted during the trial, about his alleged suicide attempt after the girl told her mother about the events and they went to report it.
In this regard, he acknowledged that he called his partner when she was at the police station filing the complaint and told her that he had taken "20 diazepams". "I said 20 as I could have said 10 or 14. One thing is what I say and another is what I would have taken," he stated, assuring that his intention was not to take his own life.
That conversation was heard by the national police officer before whom the woman was filing the complaint, who declared this Wednesday that the defendant "was nervous, crying and told her to forgive him". When asked why he said that, the defendant assured that he does not remember the entire conversation, due to the effect of the diazepam. And he has not specified how many pills he took either. "Logically I was not counting the pills I was taking," he declared, confirming later that after that call they sent him an ambulance and he had to be transferred to the Molina Orosa hospital.
"It was my way of reacting to the events that were coming upon me", "my intention was to evade", he replied to questions from the prosecutor. "Why would I want to take my own life?" he added, also denying that he had threatened the day before, when the alleged abuse was uncovered, to throw himself off El Risco de Famara.
"I have only touched that girl"
"When the mother tells him what the girl has told her, he doesn't say let's talk to a psychologist to see what's wrong. His reaction is I'm going to commit suicide, I'm taking pills and I'm locking myself in the house," the lawyer for the private prosecution, who represents the victims, questioned. In addition, this lawyer also stressed the fact that the defendant's brother refused to testify this Wednesday "so as not to incriminate him", invoking his right not to testify against him. "He wanted to remain silent, being able to have nuanced what has been said about him during the trial," he stressed.
And it is that both the mother and the agent who took his statement stated that this witness told them three years ago that his brother had admitted the facts to him, at least in part. Asked by the prosecutor if he did not tell his brother that "there was some touching", the defendant's response was "not in those words". According to him, his phrase was "I have only touched that girl", but not "in that context" of sexual content.
Later, in his last turn to speak, when he could not receive questions, he returned to this topic. "When I say that I have touched her, I never refer to sexual acts, neither lewd nor non-lewd," he stated, and then recounted an episode in which he claims that he touched the girl's breast, in response to another gesture she had made. "Her sister was in front," he added.
In addition, on another point of the testimonies heard in the trial, he denied that he asked the girl to give him massages alone in the bathroom. "If the back thing is true, the cream thing. But it was she who told me I'm going to put cream on you. And she touched my back a little, but we were there for five minutes," he argued.
"Cordial relationship" with the mother and "father-daughter" with the girl
Regarding the girl's mother, he assured that his relationship with her as a couple "was always cordial", so he has not given any reason that could justify a false accusation against him. As for the minor, he stated that at first they had "a great relationship", and even stressed that the girl loved him and that they maintained a father-daughter relationship.
"Then I don't know if it was out of jealousy of my daughter or when my son came, the behavior began to change," he added, although all he has referred to in this regard is that she was "a somewhat rebellious girl". And none of the three times that the prosecutor has asked him, he has answered what reason the girl could have to make this up.
Both in his statement and in his final plea, the defendant has focused on asking other questions. "What reason do I have to do that to a girl?", "How can they say that I liked minors?", he questioned, pointing out that he has been working with children for decades because of his profession and has "never" had a complaint.
To these, he has added other questions, about "how is it possible that he assaulted that girl and no one knew anything" - having "neighbors" or his little sisters being at home - or that the school did not give any "alarm signal" when noticing any symptom. He has even asked why the mother's first reaction after the girl told her was to go talk to him instead of going directly to the police, which she did the next day.
"Absence of motive" in the girl to lie
For his part, the prosecutor has defended in his conclusions that the facts "have been accredited and proven" during the trial and has stressed that the minor's testimony "has all the elements to have the maximum probative value". Thus, he has referred to the "absence of motive" to lie, such as "resentment or animosity", highlighting that the minor "considered the defendant a father" and "called him daddy". Also that the defendant has acknowledged that they maintained "a family relationship" and, finally, he has reiterated that the experts confirm that the girl's story is "credible".
In addition, he has referred to the psychology manuals that indicate that a symptomatology such as the one presented "may be due to exposure to death, to serious injuries" - stressing that none of these two assumptions are given - "or to sexual violence, which is what has happened".
Thus, he has requested a conviction, ratifying his request for 15 years in prison for the defendant, whom he also demands to pay compensation of 75,000 euros to the victim.
For his part, the lawyer for the private prosecution has adhered to these conclusions and has also ratified his statement of qualification, stating that he hopes that the defendant will spend "13 and a half years" in prison, considering the year and 7 months that he was already in pre-trial detention, after being arrested after the complaint was filed.
In his intervention he has also stressed that the defendant has not provided a witness or expert to support his defense. "He asked for the DVD with the minor's statement to make an expert report, which he then did not provide, obviously," he pointed out, referring to the attempt that the defense would have made to try to refute the official expert reports, against which they have finally not provided any report that says the opposite about the credibility of the girl.
The lawyer representing the victim's mother has also reproached the defendant and his defense for their attitude during the trial. "There is no right to try to throw dirt against the minor", he has questioned, referring to personal aspects that they have tried to introduce about the girl, such as whether or not she stayed with a boy at 12 years old to go to the beach.
Finally, the defense lawyer has requested the acquittal of his client, arguing that "there is not a single corroboration of what was stated by the minor" and that "what has not been accredited with a level bordering on certainty, does not exist".
