The Supreme Court (TS) has determined to lessen the sentence given to A neighbour from Tenerife accused of sexually abusing his minor stepdaughter from ten to nine years, applying the Organic Law of Integral Guarantee of Sexual Freedom, commonly referred to as “It is only yes.”
Additionally, the disqualification from any occupation that entails regular interaction with minors has been set for five years following his release, and he will be deprived of parental rights for a duration of four years.
On one occasion when he was alone with the girl, he instructed her to lower her trousers and sexually abused her, after which he requested her to remain silent.
The young girl kept this secret until she confided in her paternal grandmother, who remained silent. Ultimately, she disclosed the incident to a school friend, who informed her mother, and this led to a complaint being filed alongside the girl’s tutor against the stepfather.
A restraining order of 500 metres was immediately established as a provisional measure, following which the Provincial Court sentenced him to 10 years in prison and mandated the payment of 3,000 euros.
In 2022, the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (TSJC) upheld the sentence, a decision subsequently endorsed by the Supreme Court (TS), thereby making it legally binding.
Throughout the proceedings, the accused maintained that the child’s testimony did not meet the three criteria required by jurisprudence to establish guilt, which had already been previously challenged without success, along with other arguments that the TS noted had been consistently dismissed in prior rulings.
“Every point has been thoroughly addressed, both in the initial judgment and in the appeal, hence it is pointless to present arguments that would never outweigh past judgements,” as asserted by the two earlier judicial bodies.
The defence highlighted that the young girl initially claimed in her statement that she had fabricated the lies, and in their view, there was “little credibility given the lack of emotion when recounting the events,” which according to the TS did not negate the evidential value of her testimony, nor did alterations she made impact its validity.
Under the new legislation, the minimum sentence for such offences is seven years, which is five years less than the penalty outlined in the regulations applied in this case, where violence and lack of consent are clearly discernible, thus the severity of the sentence took into account the extent of force employed.
In fact, this element was what led the Provincial Court not to extend the prison term, which could have reached up to twelve years.
