The First Section of the Provincial Court of Las Palmas has this Tuesday judged the accused J.D.H.Y. for a crime of sexual abuse with penetration, qualified in this way because the Organic Law 10/22, known as the Only Yes is Yes Law, was not yet in force.
Before the trial began, the defendant's defense requested the suspension of the oral hearing, alleging that he had not had enough time to prepare the defense. However, the private prosecution refused. "My client is desperate and needs to move on as soon as possible," the lawyer argued. The Court refused to postpone it and recalled that during the judicial process the victim must also be taken into account.
After this refusal, the accused tried to renounce his lawyer in the oral trial itself, another new attempt that was overturned by the Chamber, where the magistrates alleged that he cannot renounce at the last minute "to avoid the trial."
In the oral hearing, held in the Arrecife Courts, the victim narrated that she met the alleged aggressor through Instagram and that they later started talking through WhatsApp in 2020. According to her testimony, their conversations began because he needed some advice about her experience at the Fishing School, where she had studied for a few years.
According to the young woman's testimony, on the night of May 7, 2020, she went for a run through her town, in San Bartolomé, when the accused allegedly surprised her with his car, since she had told him that she used to play sports in that area. After that, he introduced himself and invited her to get into the vehicle to ask her for some more advice about her educational experience. Finally, they moved in the car to a nearby open field, where it got dark, and spent several hours talking.
At one point, he allegedly snorted a line of cocaine and began to get affectionate with her. "He told me to let him sleep with me. He got on top of me, pressed my leg against the gear, immobilized me," the victim recalled in court. She accuses him of having raped her without a condom. "I tried to get out, I turned around and he got on top of me," she stressed. "He left me where he had picked me up and told me 'if I had known, I would have done it before,'" she continued.
The young woman indicated that when she arrived at her house, around 2:00 a.m., she blocked him, deleted the conversations and tried to "erase that episode", took off her clothes, and showered several times. That same night she wrote to her best friend on WhatsApp telling her what had happened. The next day, she also spoke with her sister by the same means. Finally, four days later her sister convinced her to tell her parents and go to report it.
"I had vaginal pain and psychological consequences," she added in the courtroom. The young woman, her sister and her friend narrated before the Court that since then her life was never the same and that she was forced to leave the university because of the psychological consequences of that. "She was very bad and she is very strong," her sister explained.
At the time of collecting samples, the forensic doctor noted the presence of a hickey on the neck, which the victim attributes to the moment of the sexual assault. Meanwhile, she pointed out that during the intervention she narrated the events constantly and without contradictions. On the other hand, two psychologists who treated her in the process highlighted that the results showed that the young woman was "exaggerating the symptoms", but they reject that this means that what happened is a lie or not, "she may have it to a lesser extent or not have it", they continued.
During his intervention, the accused assured that he was a smoker and cocaine user, but that he did not consume it in front of her that day because he is "reserved" and does not do it in front of people. In his statement before the judges he stated that he had had previous sexual conversations with the victim: "It was known that it was to have sex", "we arranged for that, for the little fling", he indicated.
The accused, who acknowledged that there was a sexual relationship with the victim, assures that it was at all times with consent, that he penetrated her without a condom and that the next day when he wrote to her she had blocked him. Finally, the conversations between them could not be extracted because they had deleted them, he alleged that he did it to hide from his partner that he had been with another woman.
The Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution are asking for the accused a sentence of eight years in prison with special disqualification for the right to passive suffrage during the time of the sentence. In addition, it also imposes a measure of supervised release for seven years. It also requests a restraining order that prohibits him from approaching within 500 meters of the victim, as well as her home, workplace or any other place where she is and from communicating with her by any means for 10 years.
In addition, that he compensate her with 10,000 euros for the moral damages caused.
