He took advantage of the fact that the young girl was a friend of his son to take her to his house and mistreat her. He ended up admitting it to face a compliant sentence which sentenced him to two years in prison, which he would not have to serve due to his lack of criminal record and on the condition that he complies with the ordered not to come within 400 meters of his victim for seven years. Three months after this sentence, he showed up at the door of the girls’ school. And he took advantage of a judicial error by the Provincial Court of Cádiz, which did not properly notify him of the restraining order, so as not to have to go to prison.
According to the girl’s family lawyer, Cádiz lawyer Juan Manuel Espinosa, it was on June 26 that this sentence was read in accordance with the third section of the Cádiz Provincial Court. It may attract attention to reach an agreement with the person who abused your daughter, but the lawyer justifies it. “The family did not want to put him through the trauma of a trial or attempt to discredit his testimony. With this sentence, the attacker admitted the facts and we avoided prolonging this situation with a trial and the resources that could result from it,” explains Espinosa. “The sentence ensured that the girl would not have to see this man for seven years and would not have to discuss this issue again.”
But a double miscarriage of justice ruined this objective. In September, when classes resumed, and even though his son and daughter were not in the same school, the man was seen at the door of his victim’s school. The little girl’s mother reported him. The man was arrested and taken to a cell, where he spent the night for violating the sentence imposed on him.
“What happened is extremely serious”
During the speedy trial that followed, the prosecution brought by the family and the prosecution requested his immediate entry into prison, but the man claimed that he had not received the court order indicating this restraining order. -communication. The court carried out the appropriate checks and the Provincial Court confirmed the convict’s account: the restraining order had been served on him.
The usual thing in a compliance decision is to read all the measures out loud and make them firm at that time, as if they had been notified. But that did not happen in this trial. In the video reading of the sentence, it was possible to verify that the correct notification of the agreed measures, such as this non-communication order, had not been made. The error persisted over the following months. This was not read to him at the time, nor notified in writing. The investigating court therefore left him on the street.
“What happened is extremely serious, because four months after the issuance of a restraining order which was violated, this man can walk around without problem, even if it involves abuse of a girl,” he said. .
The man also returned, at least once more, to break the restraining order. And the most serious thing is that, according to the lawyer for the young girl’s family, everything remains the same. There is no evidence that the convicted person has ever received a court order preventing him from approaching the victim. If he approached the girl again, he wouldn’t have to go to jail either.
