A man from Murcia is found guilty of exhibitionism in a sports center shower
In the Murcia Criminal Court a man was found guilty of the crime of exhibitionism for masturbating in front of a child inside the communal showers of a sports center. The appellate route taken by the defendant only involved a wash of the rings he wore on his penis, a detail he aimed to justify during the appeal before the County Court.
The second court’s decision records that the cases were properly proven at trial. It rejected the appeal and did not accept the exculpatory explanations presented by the defendants, affirming the integrity of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses who testified during the proceedings.
During the appeal the defendant argued that if he visited the showers adjacent to the one used by the child, it was not with the intention of pointing out the boy, and that the prior fixture had broken at the time. These assertions formed part of the defense strategy aimed at undermining the prosecution narrative and the interpretation of the events by the trial court.
The factual summary established by the court describes the defendant as, at the time in February 2019, aged 61, driven by a sensual impulse. He entered one of the available communal showers in the sports center along with the minor who lived next door. The record shows that the area was unoccupied at that moment, and the defendant is said to have touched the minor’s genitals and then masturbated in front of him and the other present minor.
In his appeal, the defendant sought to overturn the original verdict and obtain acquittal, contending that the court had erred in evaluating the evidence presented at the oral hearing and that he was not guilty. He also insisted that the boy’s account was not convincing due to reported contradictions in the description of the acts and how the incident unfolded.
Facing this line of argument, the Provincial Court reaffirmed that the Criminal Court afforded full weight to the victim’s statements, which the court described as difficult but credible given the circumstances of the case and the testimonies gathered during the trial. The appellate body found no reasonable basis to alter the verdict; the conviction stood, and the appeals process did not reveal persuasive grounds to acquit the defendant. The court’s assessment underscored the consistency of the testimonies and the absence of alternative explanations that could cast doubt on the prosecution’s account.
The decision reflects the careful consideration given to the accounts of the minor and the accompanying evidence, including the context of the location, the time of day, and the absence of others in the vicinity. The courts weighed the elements of the case, balancing the perspective of the defender with the procedural safeguards that accompany criminal adjudication. The outcome illustrates the judicial system’s approach to cases involving sexual offenses against minors, stressing the primacy of reliable testimony and the integrity of the investigative record. [Source: Murcia Criminal Court decision, February 2019.]
Overall, the appellate assessment upheld the established factual findings and the legal conclusions drawn by the trial court. The defendant’s arguments—centered on alleged inconsistencies in the minor’s description and questions about the evidentiary weight—were thoroughly evaluated and dismissed. The appellate decision reinforces the protection afforded to minors in sensitive criminal cases and demonstrates the scrutiny applied to witness testimony in the face of complex allegations. The court’s rulings align with the established standards for assessing credibility and the sufficiency of evidence in matters of sexual exploitation and exposure. [Citation: Court records summarizing the February 2019 proceedings.]