He Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia (TSJA) has reduced the sentence of a man who sexually abused a woman by one year 13 year old girl in application of the law of only yes is yes Promoted by the Ministry of Equality Irene Montero. The minor became pregnant after offering to support intercourse without a condom after the 26-year-old convict told him it was sterile and allergic to latex. The sentence has been reduced to nine years in prison.
The failure of TSJA rejects the appeal presented by the defendant’s defense and confirms the sentence handed down by the Audience of Almeriabut introduces the application of the most favorable norm regarding the imposition of a penalty based on the law of the only yes is yes.
The Andalusian High Court points out that the penal range for the crime for which the appellant has been convicted “is not the same” since the entry into force of the aforementioned organic law of comprehensive guarantee of sexual freedom, “taking into account the specific modality applied and the character of continued crime”, which leads to fixing as a minimum penalty in the upper half for the type applied the nine years and one day in jail.
The Appeals Chamber maintains the rest of the pronouncements, so that it ratifies the “libidinous purpose” and “with full knowledge of the age” of the victim that led the accused to have complete sexual relations with her “on several occasions” between October and November 2018, to which she agreed although “due to her age she lacked the precise maturity to provide the consent and to assess the consequences” of their actions.
The man, who was around 26 years old at the time of the events, was also sentenced to pay 30,000 euros of compensationto keep 500 meters away from the minor for 13 years, five more years of probation and to be disqualified from working as a teacher or another position in which he has direct contact with minors for 14 years.
The defendant acknowledged sexual relations with the minor, whom he had met through Instagram, although he denied knowing that she was then 13 years old or, in her case, less than 16 because “he saw her very mature», in such a way that «when he found out how old» the girl was «was when they ended the relationship».
Faced with this, the victim assured that although at first told the defendant that he was 16 years oldrevealed her real age when “they began to have sexual relations” and “despite this she continued” with said encounters until the girl became pregnant, for which she went to a clinic for the termination of pregnancy from which she was notified to the civil Guard.
“The minor was not mature enough to reach the degree of maturity that she had developed, due to her greater life experiences, the defendant, at 25 or 26 years old,” adds the court, who makes it ugly that the defendant “even knowing the age of the minor” had sexual relations with her “without any prophylactic measures that motivated the unwanted pregnancyunder the uncertain belief that the defendant “could not have children”.
