In Alicante, a 43-year-old man faced charges of sexual harassment stemming from an encounter with a woman aboard a boat trip from the city port to Tabarca Island, with a group of friends, on the nights of September 21–22, 2018. The case moved through the courts, culminating in an acquittal by the Court of Alicante’s Third Division. The ruling found that there was not enough evidence in either the investigation or the trial to prove that non-consensual sexual intercourse occurred, as alleged by the complainant. The court did acknowledge that the defendant did not provide a clear counter to the complainant’s account, but concluded that the evidence presented did not prove the charged offenses beyond reasonable doubt. The decision notes that the absence of corroborating data weakens the prosecution’s position and that the complainant’s statement alone could not be treated as sufficient proof.
The court highlighted a crucial issue: the defendant could not recall whether consent was given. The complainant suggested that she believed no intercourse occurred because the defendant would not agree to continue a relationship without condoms, and she indicated a lack of romantic interest in him. These elements formed part of the factual tapestry the court weighed as it evaluated consent and memory against the charges.
chemical shipping
The judicial decision details the test results obtained during hospital visits following the trip. Urine analysis performed when the complainant sought emergency care did not reveal the presence of opioid drugs, which undercut the hypothesis that the defendant faced a scenario involving such substances. The report also notes that the complainant stated some drugs were added to her drink, but the analysis did not corroborate this claim with detectable substances. Instead, the analysis detected ethanol at a concentration of 1.17 grams per liter. Both the defendant and the witnesses testified to drinking beer and wine during the journey, though the timing of consumption could not be precisely determined.
Furthermore, the court observed that the defendant consistently accepted the core elements of the complainant’s account that sexual activity occurred without explicit condom use and that he did not reject the contact. This stance stood in contrast to the complainant’s description, which indicated that she had vague and uncertain memories of the events. The court’s assessment ultimately hinged on the lack of definitive evidence of non-consensual intercourse and on the ambiguities surrounding consent and memory.
Based on the totality of the results and testimonies, the sentence concluded with the release of the defendant from the charges of sexual abuse and psychological injury that had been brought against him. The decision underscores the standard that, in cases of alleged sexual offenses, proof must be robust and consistent across investigative records, testimony, and forensic findings to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, while also acknowledging the challenges inherent in recollection after a night aboard.