The Supreme Court has upheld a 10-year prison term handed to a 20-year-old basketball coach at a Santa Cruz de Tenerife school after he assaulted a student who was seven years younger than him.
The justices rejected the cassation appeal filed by the defendant, who argued for acquittal or a reduced sentence. They stressed that the minor was very young at 13, and the context was especially relevant because the conduct occurred between a student and a school coach or sports instructor, suggesting the adult had a markedly higher level of personal and formative development than the pupil.
According to the ruling, the events date back to July 2018, when the accused served as a basketball team assistant. At the time, he was 20 years old and contacted the minor through Instagram, providing her phone number and then, not concealing his identity, convincing her to meet alone near the outskirts of the city at the end of July or early August.
At the first meeting, the accused touched the student, and at the second, he managed to have two complete sexual relations with her. The sentence notes that the defendant used the girl’s young age and lack of maturity, though there was no evidence of violence or intimidation.
Although the young man later asked her to send nude photos, she refused. The minor’s father reported the incidents to the police in December of that year.
NO PROXIMITY TO MATURITY
The Provincial Court condemned the young man to 10 years of prison for the continued offense of sexual abuse with carnal access, plus a 6,000-euro compensation for moral damages. It also imposed a 13-year ban on approaching the victim. The Canary Islands High Court confirmed the decision.
The defendant, dissatisfied with the penalty, challenged the case before the Supreme Court, claiming a violation of the presumption of innocence and improper application of the Penal Code.
The defendant argued that the age difference between him and the minor was not particularly relevant and insisted that there were enough indications to determine closeness in maturity that were not properly analyzed. He asserted that the girl presented on social networks with an age older than her actual one and that she preferred boys older than herself.
Thus, the defense sought application of a Penal Code provision that would exclude criminal responsibility in cases of sexual abuse if the minor freely consents or if there is a proximity of maturity.
The magistrates recalled that Spanish criminal law does not fix a defined age threshold for such a clause, unlike some countries such as France. They clarified that the law must consider both age proximity and maturity, noting that growth and learning play roles, and held that no maturity closeness existed here because the accused was a caregiver and the victim a student.
In his appeal, the defendant also argued that the minor’s statement contained important contradictions. He claimed the minor’s account was not credible and pointed out that a forensic doctor had not identified the girl when she filed the complaint.
The ruling, authored by Judge Eduardo de Porres, explains that while the minor’s statements had some imprecisions, this can be explained by the fact that victims of sexual abuse, especially when they are underage and the incidents occurred on different dates and places, do not always recall every detail with perfect precision.
The court noted that the minor described different encounters, with independent witnesses corroborating their occurrence and affirming that at least one sexual relation with penetration took place. The judges emphasized that there was no contradiction in the substance of her statements.