In Vilagarcía, a mother has turned to social media, describing herself as utterly desperate, to share a plea for help after the protective order safeguarding her child was lifted following her ex-partner’s arrest in May 2020 on suspicion of a family violence crime. Nearly four years on, the case has yet to go to trial, a delay that deeply unsettles the mother. She says she now finds herself vulnerable in a moment when the court has not yet resolved the matter, leaving her and her son exposed to further harm from the man who once threatened them.
Evidence shows the individual has a substantial police record. He was convicted of a crime described as insults and unjust mistreatment toward the child’s mother, who describes herself as physically and psychologically abused. The sentence included a six-month restraining order that expired in October 2022 and twenty days of community service. The mother argues that without concrete proof or witnesses, little action can be taken to protect them when the victims remain quiet and the case lacks corroborating testimony.
Parental Custody
The parental rights and responsibilities are shared between the father and the mother. This arrangement requires ongoing contact with the ex-partner to coordinate matters affecting their child, who is fifteen years old and has a significant cognitive disability. The mother expresses concern that the child and she would be exposed to ongoing harm if they remain dependent on a person who is unwell and causes distress, underscoring her desire for safer arrangements.
Two-Year Consideration
Regarding the restraining order that ceased to be in force on February 15, the Penal Court ruling notes that the prosecutor sought a two-year extension of the protection and a prohibition on contact with the minor. This duration represents the maximum penalty that could be imposed if the defendant were convicted, given that a trial had not yet occurred. The magistrate observed that maintaining the precautionary measure under the present conditions did not make sense, calling into question its necessity beyond the period requested by the prosecution. Judicial sources indicate that the sole formal accusation came from the public prosecutor, with no private individual stepping forward as a private prosecutor.
Instagram Contact
The child’s mother recently reported a potential breach of the precautionary measure to the National Police in Vilagarcía. Although the order was not active at the time of the report, the allegations pertain to the period between January 28 and February 12. The son told his mother that the father had contacted him on Instagram through several messages, calls, and video calls. The child reportedly said he did not want to spend time with his father because the father reminded him of the harm he had caused in the past, though he did not object to speaking on the phone.
The mother showed investigators her phone, displaying messages and audio recordings from the father, along with the history of outgoing calls and video calls. Because Instagram does not permit screenshots, a video was created with the instructor to visually demonstrate the communications. The case went to court, and the prosecutor indicated that while the testimony could point to a possible violation of an order of protection, there was no clear objective risk to either the complainant or the respondent beyond the desire to reestablish protections that had already lapsed.
The content concludes with a note that the reader should subscribe to continue reading for further updates.