The Provincial Court of Las Palmas has judged in Lanzarote a man accused of a crime of sexual abuse against his wife's daughter. The girl wrote in a diary at the age of nine, in her own words and with bluntness, that her "daddy" had asked her to perform oral sex on him. Later, she showed the diary to her brother, who ended up telling her mother. The mother reported these events in April 2012 and left the relationship with this man, although they have not yet processed the divorce.
The accused, who has a restraining order from the minor, has denied that he lowered his pants in front of the little girl, as well as that he showed her his penis and demanded oral sex, while touching her butt, as the prosecutor maintains. "How could I do that to her!", he exclaimed.
According to what he said, he met his wife when her daughter was one year old. "I recognized them as if they were my children", he said before the court, referring to the three children that his wife brought to the marriage. This man has explained that he took care of the children, "taking them to school or feeding them". Regarding the relationship with the girl who has reported these alleged abuses, he explained that he got along "very well with her".
This man maintains that the girl "got nervous and said that", that is, she recounted these alleged sexual abuses, writing them in a diary that she later showed to her brother. He believes that she got "nervous" because her mother was going to travel to her country of origin. "There has never been any problem with the girl. The girl is happy", he insisted.
During the trial, the little girl, who is now 10 years old, also had to testify, for whom the accused was "like her father". At the beginning of her statement, the minor was evasive and stated that she did not remember the events. "I don't remember very well, this happened a long time ago. I don't remember what I wrote in the diary", she said.
However, minutes later, the little girl stated that in the diary she "wrote what happened that day", when she was left alone with him. "He touched my butt and showed it to me and told me what I wrote in the diary", explained the girl, who went into her room, from which she "did not want to leave for fear". According to her account, the accused told her "not to tell anyone".
The mother has decided not to testify
The girl's brother, 13 years old, also testified at the trial. "I remember when my sister showed me the diary but not very well", he indicated. What he initially did not remember is the phrase that the girl wrote in this diary. However, when the prosecutor reminded him, the minor said that he did remember it and that after reading it he called his mother and told her. The mother was the fourth person to enter the room where this oral trial was held, but she decided to exercise her right not to testify.
The last to testify was a judicial expert, who assured that the girl's testimony is "probable and credible" "from a psychological point of view". Although the little girl has not shown any after-effects, the expert insisted that the "fact itself is harmful even if it was not carried out".
At the end of the testimonies, the prosecutor maintained her request for 5 years and six months for the accused and recalled that "he told the girl to sit on top of him, lowered his pants" and asked her to perform oral sex on him.
"The very fact is harmful"
The prosecutor acknowledged that the little girl was "evasive" in her statement at first, but later "remembered everything". "She was afraid after the events", she insisted, while saying that in these events there is "moral damage, because the very fact is harmful".
On the contrary, the defense highlighted the "lack of persistence" in the girl's testimony, who in statements prior to the trial had not indicated that her stepfather "touched her butt". "The minor has told us practically nothing", she pointed out. In addition, she insisted that in the event that the accused had lowered his pants in front of the girl and showed her his penis, a crime of exhibitionism and not sexual abuse should be applied to him. Thus, she has requested the free acquittal of her client.
The Chamber of the Court that was judging these events prevented the access of photographers and television cameras to the hearing, to preserve the identity of the minor, so it did not allow taking images of the accused either.