The Military Chamber of the Supreme Court has confirmed this Tuesday a conviction of 2 years and 3 months in prison for a Lieutenant Colonel of the Army For sexually and professionally harassing a corporal first to whom he sent a video and audio message on Telegram in which he requested “sexual favors” that she refused.
According to the proven facts of the sentence issued by the High Court, the convicted person sent the victim a message through Telegram with programmed self-destruction in which heI saw him naked and, while he touched his genitals and masturbatedHe said: “the time has come for you to know that this is yours if you want it.”
The next day, the account of the events continues, the woman went to her superior’s office and told him that I never sent him that kind of message again, to which he replied that he had the wrong addressee and asked for forgiveness.
From that moment, the Supreme considers, the lieutenant colonel changed his deal with the corporal first. He stopped speaking it, was ordering to reduce his work functions and made decisions that negatively affected their working conditions and working environment in the Logistics Group at their destination. As a consequence of all this, the corporal first received treatment for depression, apathy, anxiety, and feelings of guilt.
The Supreme Court thus ratifies the decision of the Central Military Court that sentenced the lieutenant colonel to two years and three months in prison for a crime of abuse of authority in its form of sexual and professional harassment about a subordinate. In addition to the jail sentence, the court disabled the convicted person’s right to vote and required him to compensate the victim for moral damages.
The convicted person had appealed this judgment in cassation before the High Court, questioning the computer and medical expert evidence and denying credibility to the victim’s testimony. He claimed that the Civil Guard experts did not find the videos and audios on his phone and argued that to send messages that self-destruct through Telegram it is necessary to continuously press the record button on the mobile screen and according to the statement of the corporal he had no terminal in his hand.
The High Court has rejected this last argument and, in addition, reproaches the appellant for forgetting or omitting that the experts also reported that the reason that there were no files or applications in the terminal is that the phone was erased.
Lieutenant colonel also questioned the medical proof arguing that it speaks of labor unrest and does not mention sexual harassment, an extreme that the Supreme Court also rejects, since it considers that the fact that the term is not mentioned does not imply “that the disorder suffered by the corporal first does not is the result of sexual harassment “.