The Alicante court handed down penalties in a case from Elda involving a man accused of attacking his partner and son with a can of diesel. A recent sentence reported by this newspaper during the trial shows a verdict shorter than the 16 years requested by prosecutors. The court did not find evidence of an attempted murder, noting there was no proof that the defendant ignited a lighter to set the victims on fire. The two victims did not testify against the defendant during the trial when questioned about the accusations, so the court relied on their earlier statements given to the investigating judge. Even there, they did not state that the lighter had been lit. When the defendant said he would kill them and set them on fire, his words were limited to threats rather than action.
The decision remains subject to appeal at higher courts, namely the Court of Cassation, the High Court of Justice of the Valencian Community. The judges sentenced the defendant to two years for the gasoline spray in which they considered a serious threat crime. An additional year was added for a humiliation offense linked to domestic abuse for striking his partner, and four years and six months for injuries using a dangerous instrument after he whipped the victims and even stabbed his son. The overall total was higher than the sentence originally issued for the fuel incident.
Events unfolded in the family home in Elda on March 6 of this year following a heated argument with the partner. The man assaulted the woman while the 18-year-old son attempted to escape. The accused then attacked both family members, left the house, returned with a bottle of gas, and sprayed them while threatening to light a lighter. He reportedly said a series of menacing phrases, including threats to set them on fire and to kill them, yet the lighter apparently did not ignite. He then turned to a whipping weapon to continue the assault on the partner, and the son again intervened. During the confrontation, the defendant delivered several blows to the back and arms, declaring that he would skin him because the son was a boxer. He also produced a razor, aiming it at the right shoulder area.
Image of a kerosene bottle, a knife and a whip were seized from the defendants. Information
The accused faced police custody and denied the charges at trial, admitting only that a dispute with the partner arose because the son had not returned home from a party for two days. He claimed he planned to move to Valencia to begin a new life with another woman. He contended that the gasoline was spilled during the struggle and that the son sustained injuries in a separate earlier fight before returning home.
version change
During the hearing, neither the partner nor the son wished to testify against the defendant, and when the court rejected that position, they echoed the defendant’s statements and simply answered no when pressed. They had provided detailed testimony at the time of the events, and the court based its verdict on that testimony. The sentence dismisses the exculpatory statements offered by the victims during the trial, stating that their later account does not provide a persuasive alternative explanation.
The partner described the gasoline spill as accidental, while the son asserted that the defendant sprayed them with fuel and threatened to light them and kill them. He explained that the lighter did not work, and the court could not prove that the lighter was actually lit, though it noted that the defendant showed the lighter to both victims after spraying them and issuing the threats. The ruling recalled the testimony of police officers who attended the hearing and who concluded that the fuel spillage could have been accidental.
The Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office had pressed for a 16-year sentence, proposing eight years for two counts of attempted murder. In light of the victims’ statements that later exculpated the defendant, the prosecution shifted its position to a more modest charge during the trial.