A photographer faced charges of sexual assault in connection with a model who was a student and nude subject. The resident of a Madrid apartment was acquitted after a Madrid court accepted the defense argument that the encounters were consensual. The case, investigated by CASO ABIERTO, the investigative and events channel of Prensa Ibérica, reflects the complexities of consent in intimate photography workflows. The defendant, Jaime Camper, is identified in the proceedings and media materials released for public viewing.
The principal accuser, who was 18 at the time of the incidents, alleged that the 32-year-old photographer—known in part for Polaroid-based work—raped her after a session in which she posed nude at the photographer’s home. She also reported a second assault alleged to have occurred 18 days later at a Madrid nightclub. Prosecutors and the prosecution argued for a seven-year prison term for the defendant.
“He recorded me on his mobile phone”
According to the account, the young woman moved to Madrid to study and began modeling nude work after following the photographer on Instagram. The events began on the morning of October 28, 2018, when she visited his residence for what she described as a planned project.
The court noted delays and inconsistencies
The court highlighted that the plaintiff waited about a year to file her complaint, replying that the photographer had previously sued her for labeling him a stalker and a rapist on social media. The model recounted signing an image-rights document, undressing, and posing in the living room. She claimed the photographer began recording on his personal device while she was preparing, and that they continued shooting after a midday break that included a meal together.
“Against the wall”
She described removing her shirt and lying down so photos could be taken as the photographer claimed an interest in tattoos. She was partially clothed when the photographer moved closer, began touching her legs, and pressed for closer contact. She felt uncomfortable but did not actively resist at first, later expressing strong discomfort but not fully ending the session.
She alleged the photographer kissed her and requested oral sex, describing coercive behavior that escalated, including physical force. The accusation stated that the photographer held her head and lips in a way that caused vomiting, followed by vaginal penetration. The morning after the encounter, he allegedly said he was not in love due to a seniority difference and suggested repeating the encounter soon, after which they said goodbye.
Learned helplessness
The defense argued that the events led to a dissociative state in which the accuser accepted the situation as a coping mechanism known as learned helplessness, a psychological concept presented by the accuser’s psychologist at a recent Madrid court hearing. The court, however, did not accept this framing as conclusive evidence of consent or its absence.
Two female and one male judge concluded that there was insufficient basis to state there was no consent, citing matters such as the incompleteness and inconsistency of the accuser’s testimony and its reliability in light of other testimony.
High sexual content
The court scrutinized post-incident communications and text exchanges. It noted that the accuser later sent messages and videos that contained explicit material, raising questions about the credibility of her narrative and the sufficiency of the lack of consent to support the charges. A roommate who shared the apartment testified that no distressing scenes were observed, though he did hear sounds consistent with a lively environment. The messages were discussed as potential defense material rather than definitive proof of the alleged assault.
“He ripped my trousers”
The accuser described a second incident at a Madrid nightclub on November 15, 2018, in which she said the defendant approached her while intoxicated and repeatedly pressed for closeness, culminating in vaginal contact and the removal of clothing. She claimed the defendant’s behavior bordered on coercive, even while alleging intoxication or drug influence as a factor. The court found the explanations insufficient to prove an assault of the recognized severity beyond a disputed evening of contact.
“accepted status”
In reviewing at least one nightclub interaction, the court observed that there was touching but not clear violence, and that there was no documentation of a formal report from others present, nor clear evidence of injuries. The judges highlighted that the accuser waited a year to bring the case to trial and only did so after the photographer filed a separate suit about alleged character attacks on social media. In this context, the court treated the case as disputable and not definitively proving the claimed assault.