Five years in prison or ten years of deportation from Spain—that is the sentence handed down by the 6th High Criminal Court in Palma for a violent home invasion targeting a 91-year-old woman. The court considered the defendant’s role in an offense marked by force, intimidation, and the breach of a vulnerable elder’s sanctuary. The ruling reflects the seriousness with which authorities treat crimes that invade personal safety and home life, especially when a senior resident is subjected to fear and physical coercion.
The events judged occurred on the eighth floor of a building along Avenidas de Palma, spanning from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on 19 November 2021. The defendant, described as Venezuelan-born, was known to manage the rental property and acted as an intermediary in earlier arrangements. This familiarity with the building and its occupants played a role in the sequence of actions that followed, underscoring how access to a target can be facilitated by prior knowledge of the premises and routine schedules.
According to the court record, the accused, along with an unidentified accomplice, posed as ordinary postal workers as a ruse to gain entry. Once inside the residence, the intruders forcefully pushed the caretaker, then restrained the elderly resident and a pair of helpers with zip ties, followed by gagging using duct tape. The intrusion not only disrupted daily life but also heightened the victims’ sense of insecurity within their own home, a place traditionally regarded as the safest refuge.
Financial evidence presented at trial showed that 4,400 euros in cash were stolen from the dwelling, a sum that the court weighed carefully when determining damages and restitution. In addition to the monetary loss, the defendant was ordered to provide compensation of 2,000 euros to the elderly woman who suffered the impact of the crime. The forensic step noted in the case—fingerprints found on the tape—contributed to establishing a link between the suspect and the physical evidence left at the scene, reinforcing the prosecution’s argument about the offender’s presence and actions during the intrusion.