The military court ruling confirms an eight to ten-month imprisonment for five sergeants of a cavalry unit stationed in Tenerife, stemming from the harassment of a fellow sergeant within the Mistral Battery of the 93rd Field Artillery Regiment between 2015 and 2017. The verdict sustains a sentence that punished one sergeant with ten months and the other four with eight months, under Article 50 of the Military Criminal Code, for a serious violation of personal dignity and of duties tied to military employment at or connected to Armed Forces facilities. The court also ordered all five to pay 3,000 euros in non-pecuniary damages to the victim. — Source: Military Court
The appellate chamber rejected objections to the punishment, stating that the acts constitute a breach of fundamental rights and public freedoms of the army. The court emphasized that the penalties were not merely disciplinary but addressed a serious impairment of the victim’s dignity within the military structure. A monetary compensation of 3,000 euros was deemed appropriate for the non-pecuniary harm suffered. — Source: Military Court
Investigative findings show that the abused sergeant, though not the oldest member, held a highly specialized role within the Mistral Battery’s simulator unit. The five defendants referred to the victim as “Mouse,” a nickname tied to his good rapport with the Brigade, and they used this label without his knowledge. The behavior demonstrated a pattern that extended beyond isolated incidents, suggesting a sustained climate of harassment. — Source: Military Court
In September 2015, the Brigade and the victim were part of a group of soldiers conducting training and assessment exercises at the Segovia Artillery Academy, operating within a simulator from Monday to Friday. The Union had proposed delaying the assessment to Thursday so that participants could socialize that evening without the burden of the next-day evaluation. The sergeant declined, believing Segovia had already moved on with duties. This decision set a backdrop for subsequent coercive behavior. — Source: Military Court
Reports also indicate an incident in Tenerife in which a fellow soldier criticized the Brigade by claiming another sergeant had taken a personal day for private business due to a hangover. This disclosure appears to have escalated pressure on the victim, contributing to a hostile environment. — Source: Military Court
Throughout 2016, up to the victim’s discharge, the sergeant endured persistent insults while being ostracized from the convicted group. The victim was subjected to degrading nicknames such as “whistleblower,” “Mouse,” “Brigade’s bastard,” and “Brigade’s little bitch.” The abuses extended to public ridicule tied to personal ties within the unit, including a mocking remark directed at a birthday celebration. These actions reflect a sustained campaign of humiliating treatment. — Source: Military Court
The appellate chamber’s analysis confirms a clear overlap among the elements defining the offenses, with emphasis on repetition and the severity of the harassment. The decision notes that the acts went beyond routine disciplinary cross-overs and formed a pattern that seriously damaged the victim’s personal and professional reputation within the armed forces. — Source: Military Court
From a legal perspective, the court underscored the subjective element behind the offenses, showing that the defendants acted with awareness and intent to degrade the affected party. The judgments align with the understanding that such conduct erodes trust, undermines morale, and violates the core dignity protected by military law. The decision characterizes the conduct as a persistent, systematic series of acts that so seriously harmed the victim’s well-being that it constitutes a grave assault on dignity under the applicable code. — Source: Military Court