Criminal Chamber Supreme Court He sentenced a 33-year-old Briton, identified as BDR, to 135 years in prison for dispersing on a forum. pedophilia photos and videos of about thirty girls That their parents looked after in their home or taught English at a school in Madrid. The high court upheld his sentence for eight counts of recidivism, including making child pornography, revealing 32 secrets, and a crime against moral integrity.
According to proven facts, man, Convicted of child pornography in the UK in June 2016, he began criminal activities in Spain in August of the same year. Zaragozawhere he was hired as an ‘au pair’ by a family and caregiver of minors. The accused took photos and videos of the children and distributed them to third parties. He also adds that “in blatant contempt for the dignity of minors, he emptied some spaghetti and then fed them to those who needed to look after them …, all of which was recorded on an electronic device.” truths.
Later, he moved similarly with a family with three young children in Madrid in 2017. ANDFrom January 2018 to June 2019 she worked at a school in Madrid.here, she adds, “taking advantage of her teacher status and the fact that she was alone in the classroom with the minors, she recorded and photographed several videos focusing on the underpants’ panties, and in other cases the camera under the skirt.”
Using the accused’s previous child pornography material, self-created montages, and videos and photographs of school minors, made available some of these materials distributed on a pedophilia forum.
He gave a copy of the Israeli passport, which turned out to be fake, influencing the necessary elements, in order to hide his criminal record to work as a native English speaking assistant teacher first at school and then at another centre. As copies of an official degree from the University of Hertfordshire, these were again fake reproductions and a copy of the proficiency certificate was another fake.
The high court rejected the objection, except for the 1 year and 9 months prison sentence that the defendant received for the crime of continuing to falsify the official document.Since they are copies, it has been evaluated that the crime of falsification may occur in a private document, not in an official document, and the penal requirements for copies are not fulfilled.