A court in Alicante heard a case this Tuesday involving a defendant charged with sexual assault against a woman he met on December 1, 2019, at a beach area near San Juan. After several weeks of communicating via Tinder, the dating app, prosecutors and a special division requested conviction. The Tenth Division court was asked to impose six years in prison and 6,000 euros in damages, while the defense argued that the complaint was part of a conspiracy and sought acquittal.
During the hearing, the defendant described the day of the incident as one where after having several beers at a cafe and a beachside bar in San Juan, they later visited a 24-hour clinic and shared a meal that allegedly caused him to feel unwell and vomit. He stated that they then went to his home in Mutxamel, where the woman asked for pajamas. After they settled into bed, he maintained that what occurred was consensual sexual activity.
The defendant added that they were lying close to each other and parted ways the following day without any immediate issue. He claimed that later messages from the woman led to continued contact, but he did not intend to pursue the relationship because his own relationship with his girlfriend had resumed. Nevertheless, within four or five days, the woman allegedly stayed in touch and said she was concerned about a possible sexually transmitted infection, which he said caused him worry. He denied sexually harassing the woman or using drugs and said he filed his own complaint against the woman because he felt upset that she had returned to her life elsewhere.
Confirmed complaint
The complainant testified that her initial purpose on Tinder was to practice language skills and make friends, not to engage in sexual activity. She claimed that the defendant half-dragged her toward his home, helped her into pajamas, and lay down beside her. According to her account, when the defendant lowered his trousers, she woke to find him performing a sexual act on her, an experience she says she did not consent to. She recalled telling him that she did not want it, and she described feeling overwhelmed and frightened as she later ejaculated on his back. Upon waking, she could not remember some details of the incident but knew that something was seriously wrong. After returning home, she spoke with a friend and decided to report the matter to the authorities.
Witnesses in the case described seeing the two individuals in the tavern together, both apparently intoxicated and sharing a kiss without apparent trouble at that moment. One witness indicated a conversation with the complainant on Tinder, but observed that when the complainant began to experience difficulty, they did not remain with him. The defendant’s girlfriend corroborated that she knows the complainant and noted that both had interactions within the same urbanization near the San Juan beach, suggesting a possible fixation on the partner involved.
Throughout the proceedings, the court weighed the testimonies, the timelines, and the statements made by all parties. The prosecution pressed for a firm judgment, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged non-consensual act and the harm reported by the complainant. The defense insisted that the events were misinterpreted or exaggerated and highlighted inconsistencies in certain accounts. The case thus centers on questions of consent, physical coercion, and the impact on the complainant, balanced against the defendant’s version of events and the defense’s assertion that allegations may have been influenced by personal grievances and relationship dynamics.