The Provincial Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife has convicted a woman for a minor crime of injuries to a man who, according to the testimony of the complainantreceived a beating after refusing to “hit on” her.
The woman, according to the sentence, must pay a fine of 90 euros and 8,600 euros to the complainant.
The facts They took place at the beginning of 2022 in a bar in the capital of Tenerife and according to the man’s story, the woman wanted to flirt with the man but he rejected her with the argument that he was married.
The facts
Then she grabbed him and pulled on his shirt, as she left the place saying: «You’re going to find out, I’m going to call my children to bust you».
Around eleven o’clock at night on the same day when the man On his way home, he met several people, including the accused, who attacked him, according to the ruling.
The result was that the victim suffered multiple contusions and right eye swelling who required the prescription of analgesics and anti-inflammatories for a period of fifteen days, of which one was hospitalized.
According to the ruling, currently there are still consequences that give rise to aesthetic damage, although a relationship cannot be established between what happened and the injuries that he presents in the teeth and mouth.
The convicted person filed an appeal before the Court that was rejected and in which he expressed the lack of evidence against him to show that he actually hit the complainant who he says is an alcoholic and drug user and had had a confrontation with another man in the bar hours before.
For his part, he indicates that he only threatened him and did not hit him, and asked that the man be given a toxicological test to prove that he is addicted and that the injuries predate that day.
This proof It was inadmissible as it had not been proposed at the time, while in terms of the clinical history in the court’s possession, there is no evidence that it had been attended to days before.
Failure
The Court responds to the appeal that the lower court ruling is correct and that in the absence of direct evidence, other evidence must be resorted to, which in this case leads to the consideration that the ruling is in accordance with the law.
Added to this is that the victim’s version is considered credible and coherent, without incurring any contradiction, ambiguity or misunderstanding regarding aspects such as the place, time and circumstances of what happened.
The main proof is precisely the injuries that suffers corroborated by the forensic and that they are compatible with having received kicks and punches in the face, thorax, abdomen and legs, as can be seen in the photos provided.
The Court takes into account that from the beginning the man identified her as author of the attacklocated where she lived and gave her name, while she limited herself to denying her guilt, that she knew the complainant or that she had met him at the bar.
