The Provincial Court of Las Palmas has ratified the sentence of two minors for assaulting another young man during the Costa Teguise carnivals in 2015 and has rejected the appeals they filed against the judgment of first instance, issued by the Juvenile Court of Las Palmas. Thus, it has confirmed the imposed penalties, of 6 months of supervised release for one of them and 5 months of socio-educational tasks for the other, in both cases for a lack of injuries.
According to the sentence, the events occurred at about 3 am on March 8, 2015, when one of the accused, who was then 17 years old, addressed another young man and, "without justified cause for it", called him "clown". Then, "in an evident state of aggressiveness and with the intention of attacking his physical integrity", he hit the young man in the face.
The sentence indicates that this caused the victim to defend himself, but then three other people intervened who also began to hit him. Among them was another defendant, who at that time was also 17 years old, while the other two were already of legal age and were tried in another proceeding.
As a result of the kicks and punches he received, the victim suffered various injuries, including in the nose and cheekbones, which took 7 days to heal. For three of those days "he could not perform his usual occupations", so he claimed compensation, which the sentence has set at 320 euros. The parents of the convicted persons will have to respond for that sum.
They claimed that there was no evidence and that the right of defense was violated
In the appeal they filed against the judgment of first instance, the defenses argued that authorship had not been proven and that there was not enough evidence for the conviction. In addition, they argued that the right of defense had been violated during the trial, because during the statement of the first of the minors, the other "was invited to leave" the room.
In this regard, the Court points out that the lawyer did not object or allege anything at the time and that he was present at the statement, "so none of the minors has been deprived of the possibility of being heard, nor of the possibility of witnessing the practice of the admitted evidence".
In addition, reproducing what was indicated by the Prosecutor's Office when opposing the appeal of the convicted, the new sentence indicates that the judge of first instance did not support her ruling "on the possible contradictions between the minors", "but on the testimonial practiced during the trial", that is, in the account provided by the witnesses during the oral hearing.
And it also does not consider it relevant that the DVD of the other trial, against the adults who also intervened in the aggression, was not allowed to be incorporated into the case. "Bringing the recording of another trial without further ado could only generate a certain contamination of the one at hand, as it would adulterate the essence of the oral procedure", the sentence states.
Thus, it confirms the judgment of first instance and concludes that it is proven that the two minors assaulted the other young man causing minor injuries, so it confirms the penalties imposed in the judgment of first instance, which thus becomes final.
