The waitress did not lie when reporting harassment by her boss at the bar. She described touching and slapping at the waist, back, and buttocks, and a hug she did not welcome that was forced on her despite her clear signals. She spoke of a pattern of improper behavior that left her uneasy and anxious in the work environment.
The bar owner, identified by initials PDL, was described as acting with a sensual mood and drawing close to staff and customers as they approached him at work, including moments away from the premises in the nearby shopping center. On a late night, around 00:30 on 25 April 2022, he reportedly hugged and kissed her on the face, forehead, and mouth against her will. This conduct was deemed sexual harassment and abuse and led to a prison sentence of one and a half years after the court found sufficient evidence to convict the business owner of the charged offenses.
The victim, who worked weekends and Easter holidays, endured repeated conduct that caused emotional and psychological distress. The court noted that the pattern of behavior suggested an attempt at sexual gratification by the defendant. The judge considered the young woman’s testimony as strong enough to support the charges brought by the authorities.
The judge emphasized the persistence and consistency of the account, including prior statements given to the Civil Guard before the hearing, and rejected any claim of fabricated motives or distorted accusations. The victim stated that the harassment occurred in the warehouse and that, when she attempted to leave, the defendant sometimes asked for forgiveness and claimed the acts were done out of affection.
The young woman, once confined to her accommodation following the events, later returned to the bar to retrieve her personal belongings. The hearing record includes voice messages to a friend that conveyed the victim’s utter desolation and confusion. These messages reveal moments when she could not articulate what had happened, reflecting the emotional shock of the episode.
Audio recordings documented by the notary corroborated the complainant’s nervous state and discomfort. Only after she could calm down did she recount the events with sufficient detail for the authorities. The Civil Guard confirmed that the victim appeared distressed, very nervous, and tearful when she reported the incident hours after it occurred.
Both the bar owner and the victim faced trial costs. The testimony established that they did not previously know each other beyond neighborly relations in the Sayaguesa town, and the bar’s location reduced the likelihood of a false motive, conflict, or ulterior intent in the complaint.
The victim did not seek compensation for psychological damage in this case, a factor cited to counter any impression that the lawsuit was pursued for financial gain or personal harm. The court’s decision reflected a thorough evaluation of the evidence and the testimonies, underscoring the seriousness with which sexual harassment and abuse cases are treated in the workplace.