It took decades for justice to acknowledge a grave wrong in the case of Ahmed Tommouhi
A Moroccan bricklayer who had been living in Barcelona, Tommouhi was convicted in 1992 of two sexual assaults carried out by a local rapist with whom he shared a room. The accusations, based largely on similar physical features and circumstances, led to a sentence that overshadowed facts that later appeared to be inconsistent. The judicial process that followed would become a focal point in discussions about wrongful convictions and the handling of forensic evidence in Catalonia.
The Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court later handed down a 24-year sentence for two rapes and two injuries. Contested aspects of the case included the absence of semen analysis matching Tommouhi on clothing belonging to one victim. The Court of Cassation later suggested that preserving the penalty under the principle of legal certainty did not justify a miscarriage of material justice, implicitly recognizing that true justice might have been compromised. This stance opened doors for reconsideration of the evidence and the possibility of correcting judicial errors.
In January, Supreme Court judges permitted the defense to appeal, taking into account new evidence and facts presented by the convict. Among the newly considered material was a report on semen traces found on a victim’s clothing, which had not been weighed at trial and raised questions about the link to Tommouhi. The defense argued that this report indicated the semen did not originate from him.
Experts did not comment
The 1992 report was reviewed by the Barcelona Science Police but, remarkably, was never presented to the court because the experts did not testify, even though the test was recognized as valid. The defense argued that the report showed discrepancies with Tommouhi’s involvement, a point they believed established new grounds for reconsideration.
The evidence list at trial also included statements from experts and the victim, whose testimony had been the primary basis for the conviction, though later reflections suggested misstatements in describing Tommouhi. In the official records, the judge’s report did not attract the court’s attention at the time, and when the defense pressed for a fresh look, the court did not summon additional testimony.
Other new facts
The defense highlighted additional exculpatory evidence, including references to other legal proceedings and the existence of a genetic profile that matched another individual with similar physical traits. The implication was that the same genetic evidence could point to a different suspect, a notion that could undermine the strength of the original charges against Tommouhi.
Problems for the appellant began in 1991, amid a wave of violent incidents in Barcelona and Tarragona. Tommouhi and a fellow Moroccan national, Abderrazak M., were arrested. A 1993 Civil Guard report later suggested no known link between the two men, a finding that complicated the prosecution’s narrative.
At first, Tommouhi faced 17 charges, but the legal process culminated in a sentence exceeding a century for four rapes and one robbery. The case relied heavily on victim statements, which later appeared to contain inconsistencies. Abderrazak M., who had always maintained innocence, declined a state compensation offer and died in prison in 2000.
In 1995, authorities arrested another man, Antonio GC, who resembled Tommouhi and faced several similar accusations. DNA evidence linked him to one of the four alleged violations, but no tissue or biological material was preserved for the other three, leaving Tommouhi still charged with three sexual assaults.
Ultimately, Tommouhi spent 15 years in prison awaiting what many saw as an overdue correction. The Supreme Court’s recommendation for forgiveness, echoed by Catalonia’s chief prosecutor, underscored the delicate balance between punishment and fairness in the face of evolving evidence.