“It happened to me and my roommate did the same to her, and when we got out of the shower and went to the bedroom, she walked in without knocking, it happened every day.” This story was heard in a newspaper yesterday. monitoring room Vigo City of Justice, that of Criminal Court no. The person who made it a mentally disabled woman In 2020, at the height of the alarm situation mandating house arrest, the so-called victim sexual abuse by a monitor in the supervised apartment where he lives with other colleagues.
The victim was not in the courtroom at this time. Their performance was heard thanks to a voice. record already carried out at the previous stage of the judicial investigation and constituted as follows: ready test precisely to be seen and heard at the trial with all the assurances so that the woman does not have to testify again for the same facts. Just like her story, the story of her roommate, the other victim who allegedly took place in this sexual harassment case. Between March and June 2020coincides with the decree of the central government. alarm status after entering covid pandemic.
in a foundation
The accused was previously an observer. hired by a foundation working with and caring for people with mental disabilities – who will not be named to protect the identity of the victims – and as a result of the closure decision support staff in a supervised apartment inhabited by a group of usersIncluding 2 injured. The prosecutor’s office, which filed a criminal complaint against him, ongoing sexual abuse offense These two women sought to be sentenced to prison on the provisional certificate of proficiency. 5 years in prisonas well as being prohibited from attending or participating in activities or events targeting minors. It also demands deportation sentences, a sex education program, and compensation for each of the two women. 6,000 Euros for moral damage.
denied everything. “My intention is to testify and defend myself,” he said at the beginning of his speech. After stating at first that the accusation against him could stem from “misunderstandings” or a wrong “perception”, he stated: He believed that one of the women had reported him and “rejected” him because he was attracted to him. and that the other user’s second complaint is about “making the sausages fat”. Considering that the prosecutor was surprised by this and other comments made at this stage of the interrogation, she clarified that she thought she would “pressure” her colleagues and even the foundation’s management to file a complaint against her as well.