prosecutor Cullera herd caseFive men, who were arrested and tried for allegedly harassing and harassing a woman at the exit of the Mareny de Sant Llorenç nudist beach in Ribera Baixa municipality, objected to the acquittal of the 18th Criminal Judge in July. He asks Valencia and Audiencia de València to annul this decision and repeat the hearing “in front of a different magistrate”.
Public Ministry, «lack of rationality in evaluating evidence » “to the lack of rationality in true motivation, departure from the principles of experience, logic, and reason, as well as neglecting the evaluation of some proposed and accepted tests». In a short but firm appeal, the prosecutor humiliates the judge, who does not believe the victim, i.e., questions whether his testimony was persistent over time, based on justification, as is necessary in these cases. semantic problemson the one hand and spatial and temporal computationfor the other.
Like this the judge questioned the woman because of touch different terms such as “ass”, “hip” or “shin legs” – described tapping as “draging” in different expressions. Thus, the prosecutor told himself that “not always using the same word or phrase” does not merely reduce the persistence of the accusation, “on the contrary, is an indication of the presence [del abuso sexual]» and also «significantly increase the objective credibility of the victim.».
Thus, he reminds the magistrate: “Those who testify at trials are not robots.. While telling the facts, they do so dynamically, changing the accessory terms, but always respect the core of the factsthat is, one of the defendants touched the back of the victim with a “sensual spirit” and “sexist comments.”
The Public Ministry, in its appeal to the Audiencia de València, requests that the case be repeated with another magistrate.
Similar questioning the woman because she said she had it with her hand, even though she didn’t see it – the touch was the back – the magistrate reaffirms that he “describes the drag pressure very well” and “very well” that the woman felt. “Life experience tells us what we do with our hands.”
Likewise, the judge blamed the victim. I didn’t know how long it took to get over the podium approached or the length of it. The prosecutor explains: «cannot be necessary victims of such crimes millimeter precisiona in terms of space-time typical for those who carry a meter or a stopwatch».
Finally, he blames the judge. did not take into account the statement of the couple from whom the victim sought help And so is the forensic report. The prosecutor evaluates “Two testimonies omitted in the reasoning of the sentence”, “vitally importantSince they are the people who see the victim immediately after the events, describing his mood, the accused’s laughter and other simultaneous situations, the judge refers only to the defendant’s departure in the car» and ignores it. “all references to the essential essence of phrases.”