The Provincial Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife has refused to annul a sentence of the Criminal Court that imposed an 8-month prison sentence on a woman for considering her the author of a crime of serious threats, of which her neighbor who was pregnant was the subject. .
The events took place on the afternoon of April 30, 2023 when the defendant, who has two other convictions for crimes of domestic violence in 2017 and 2013, was on public roads around the home of the threatened woman.
From there he could see that the complainant was a few meters away along with her minor children, so due to previous problems with her and her family, he took a knife and began to insult her and tell her that he was going to end her life.
While she hit a metal railing with the weapon, using so much force that it broke into several parts, which instead of causing her to stop her attitude, caused her to enter her home and grab another large machete with a sharp tip. and a chair that he used as a shield, according to the lower court ruling.
Then he went down to the street, the pregnant woman went over and with the same intention of scaring them, she once again threatened all the neighbors who were there, telling them that she was going to end their lives, while brandishing the knife and advancing towards them.
As a result, everyone present fled except the complainant who, due to her advanced state of pregnancy, fainted for which she had to be assisted.
The convicted woman unsuccessfully alleged before the Court that an error was made given that the trial judge has based the entire ruling solely on the testimony of witnesses who, according to her point of view, lack credibility given their closest relationship to the victim and with the background of the facts.
The Chamber’s response is that it cannot confirm whether the witnesses’ statement was true or not, but only limit itself to verifying that they offered it during the oral hearing and that they did so in a legally unobjectionable manner.
The Court remembers that at the time the possibility that the witnesses were closer to one party than the other was already warned to the magistrate and they were evaluated to analyze the credibility of their testimonies.
The sentence is now final and there is no appeal against it.
