Section presented as factual findings from the legal sentence. For 18 years, contact is prohibited and staying at least 300 meters away from the victim’s home is required. The defendant is barred from pursuing any professional activity. A 21-year sentence was imposed for offenses involving a minor, with nine years of probation to follow after release. He is also ordered to pay 14,000 euros in compensation to the minor. The defendant was 33 years old when these assaults began, and the case was adjudicated in Orihuela courts.
The ruling established that the defendant acted as his mother’s romantic partner and abused the trust created by family proximity for sexual purposes. He frequently touched the minor’s buttocks, and after the boy emerged from the shower, he took nude photographs and touched the child’s breasts. On other occasions, he grabbed the minor by the hair and neck and forced oral sex. He also had sexual relations with a minor and used threats such as, “If you tell, I will kill you and you will never see your sisters again.” The young woman endured this abuse for three years. The court described the situation as a real hell created by this sexual predator and noted that, to neutralize her opposition, he immobilized, beat, and threatened to kill or harm her or prevent contact with her sisters, as stated in the sentence.
with his biological father
When the girl reached age 15 she went to live with her biological father, and five years later she filed a report about these events. In February 2021, at age 20, she decided to disclose the pain she had suffered, explaining that fear for her sisters drove the decision. The decision notes that she disclosed her experiences because she was afraid the defendant might harm her sisters as well. As a result of this ordeal, she now suffers from severe post-traumatic stress disorder. The judgment acknowledges that, given ongoing circumstances, the defendant should benefit from the reform enacted last year which emphasizes that consent matters and reinforces that a minimum sentence cannot be altered by later changes in the law.
Transport of prisoners to the Elche City of Justice is part of the procedural context recorded in the case materials.
“For money and damage”
During the hearing the defendant denied the facts that sustained the conviction and challenged the credibility of the victim’s statements, despite accompanying expert testimony. The court stated that there were no objective reasons to doubt the victim’s account, even in the absence of statements outside of her testimony. The judgments reflect the court’s confidence in the victim’s narrative and in the psychologic assessments presented by experts. The defense’s argument that the claim was motivated by financial gain or resultant disputes with the father of the victim’s children was discussed, but the court found insufficient support for such a motive, noting that the victim’s account remained credible and coherent. The court also discussed the possibility that material interests were involved but concluded that the expert opinions supported a finding of abuse rather than opportunistic fabrication.
The defense contended that the entire case was fabricated for monetary reasons, or due to conflicts between the victim’s partner and the father of her daughters. The court, however, placed significant weight on the psychologists’ expert opinions, indicating that when the complaint was filed at age 20 there was no ongoing custody dispute, and that the claim did not appear to be driven by such conflicts. The implication drawn was that the financial aspect, if any, did not override the established abuse pattern and the victim’s credibility.
Calvary
The decision notes the painful truth that the victim believed her mother was aware of the abuse and did nothing. A psychologist explained at the hearing that the victim often felt compelled to protect herself, shaping a defensive stance that made it difficult to speak out. The psychologist described a pattern wherein the family environment and the shared home facilitated the abuse, often occurring after family dinners in what was effectively a duplex living situation. Several testimonies emphasized the difficulty of disclosure and the fear that others would not believe the victim. The decision describes how the victim finally spoke about the brutality after receiving treatment at a hospital and the Torrevieja 24-hour Women’s Center, which provided necessary care and support. This context helps illuminate why the disclosures occurred later and how the healing process began, even as the impact of the trauma persisted—an enduring consequence for the survivor and a reminder of the resilience required to break silence.
The judgment underscores the survivor’s journey, acknowledging that the disclosure came after long periods of trauma and the realization that the surrounding circumstances might fail to protect her. It highlights the need for ongoing support and recognition that healing continues long after legal conclusions are reached. The record closes with an acknowledgement of the substantial emotional toll and the lasting implications of these offenses on the survivor’s life and sense of safety.