The High Court of Justice of Catalonia revokes a conviction for attempted sexual assault upon deeming the victim's account "insufficient"

The Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands has revoked the sentence of ten years in prison for a man accused of two counts of attempted sexual assault against a minor under sixteen years of age.

The man had been convicted in October 2025 by the Provincial Court of Las Palmas for attempting to sexually assault his underage niece on two occasions.

In the revocation of the judicial ruling, the TSJC concludes that the burden of proof does not have the necessary level to overcome the presumption of innocence, while pointing out the "insufficiency" of the evidence and contradictions.

Thus, the court indicates that only the minor's testimony exists, while asserting that testimonial evidence, such as the mother's statement, the psychological report, or the teachers' accounts, have no "relevance," because they are witnesses who "know no more than what the young woman says."

The sentence of the Provincial Court of Las Palmas, now revoked, stated that the man shared a home with his sister and niece. Thus, the judicial ruling was based on two episodes. The first, in September 2019, when the minor's mother was out of the house, the sentence had considered it true that her uncle approached her "hitting her on the head and face, while holding her, causing surprise and fear in the minor."

At that moment, he would have lowered his pants and underwear for her to perform oral sex on him. At that time, according to the revoked ruling, the minor's screams for help caused someone on the street to warn that if they didn't stop, they would call the police. At that moment, the accused did not complete his action and the minor was left crying.

Subsequently, in April 2022, also included in the now-revoked sentence, the accused had been "monitoring and stalking" the minor's movements outside the house, taking advantage of her leaving private lessons to try to assault her in a vacant lot, he lowered his pants and underwear and tried to get her to perform oral sex on him. The minor reported the events four days later to the school counselor, who informed the educational center and then the police.

The minor presents a picture of post-traumatic stress, anxious depressive reactions, and suicidal ideation, "compatible" with having been exposed to situations of sexual violence.

The ruling underlines that “no further evidence is available than that of the minor's statement” in one of the episodes, and that in the other there are “contradictions” that prevent the accusatory account from being sustained with the degree of certainty required. Therefore, it concludes that the evidence is insufficient to uphold the conviction. 

The dissenting opinion of a magistrate

Magistrate Carla Bellini has disagreed with the majority criterion of the chamber and has issued a dissenting opinion against the criterion of her colleagues. Bellini has defended that the victim's statement is an "apt piece of evidence" and, "in many cases, the only one". At the same time, she has pointed out that "there is sufficient evidentiary burden to uphold the conviction".

In her dissenting opinion, she also indicated that the contradictions pointed out "do not [...] have the consideration of being core, in order to overcome the presumption of innocence" and added that there is "legal and factual support" to endorse the conviction. The magistrate indicated that the victim's statement has been "forceful and persistent".