In Valencia, the 8th High Court for Criminal matters handed down a sentence concerning a teacher at IES Llopis Marí in Cullera. The case involved the teacher striking a student on the leg with a harpoon during school hours. The presiding judge described the teacher as the person responsible for the injury and classified the act as a crime of injury rooted in gross negligence. According to the court document obtained by El Periódico de España of the Prensa Ibérica group, damages were mitigated in the adjudication. Consequently, a daily fine of 10 euros was imposed for six months, and the victim was awarded compensation of 3,000 euros for injuries and residual effects, in addition to an amount already paid by the defendant.
Still, the victim’s family has announced plans to appeal, arguing that the judge did not grant a two-year disqualification for the teacher. The family contends that the sentence reflects multiple irregularities on the day of the incident: the teacher allegedly removed the student from the campus during school hours, used an uninsured fishing rifle, transported the pupil to a health facility rather than to an ambulance, and urged the student to lie about what happened. The student later transferred to another school and ultimately returned to the same institute where his mother also taught.
El Periódico de España reported that the events occurred at around noon on October 7, 2020. The teacher arrived at the center during Physical Education to supervise a class of students aged 14 and 15. He reportedly asked his ESO class to accompany him to the parking lot to demonstrate a catch, claiming to be fishing, and invited them outside the school grounds to the vehicle where he kept the gear.
According to the sentence, the teacher produced an unloaded firearm described as a “Cresi Sioux I 50 cm” rifle from the car trunk, a weapon he did not hold a license or insurance for. He subsequently fired, unintentionally injuring the student in the right groin in a moment witnessed by others. The injuries required medical attention, including sutures, and resulted in a period of bed rest, moderate residual health impacts, and a trace of post-traumatic stress. The narrative notes the incident left a lasting mark on the student’s physical and emotional well-being.
unbearable abandonment
The court document states unequivocally that the accused was a Physical Education teacher at IES Llopis Marí and that the events occurred in the school courtyard. It states that the acts were performed in a setting tied to the school environment and during official hours, confirming the professional status of the individual involved.
The judge characterizes the incident as serious imprudence: the defendant took a weapon into a setting with underage students, failed to verify whether the gun was loaded, and allowed a sequence of actions that reflected dangerous negligence. The ruling notes that, given the defendant’s role as a teacher who exhibited a dangerous instrument to his underage students, the acts qualify as a serious form of imprudence under the circumstances.
The court also confirmed that, after the event, the teacher tried to influence the narrative by asking the students not to disclose the truth. There was no public apology or direct outreach to the families to address the harm caused. This sequence aligns with the version provided by the student’s family to the newspaper and is cited in the document as part of the overall conduct surrounding the incident.
they don’t disable it
The sentence details a pattern of irregular conduct by the educator: leaving the students unattended within the school grounds, attempting to delegate responsibility to another teacher, transporting the injured pupil in a private vehicle without following the established protocols, and urging minors to conceal the truth about what occurred.
Despite the penalty, the student’s family remains unsatisfied. In a conversation with this newspaper, the student’s father stated that he seeks a two-year disqualification for the teacher. The judge, however, rejected this request, stating that the improper behaviors described did not directly relate to the crime under prosecution and that the harmful outcome did not stem from a professional context that would warrant disqualification. The ruling notes no explicit failure in the teacher’s professional duties that would necessarily justify disqualification, even if the actions were reckless.
“It is hard to understand why a teacher who committed such irregularities is not disqualified. The events included taking the children off school property, handling an unsafe gun, harming my son, taking them to a health center without calling an ambulance, and pressuring them to lie. There was no clear communication with the families,” commented Jaume, the student’s father, who also announced plans to appeal the sentence.
back to school
The incident’s aftermath included the student changing schools and later returning to the original center where the event occurred, partly due to his mother being a staff member there. He was reassigned within the Physical Education department to avoid direct contact with the same teacher who had harmed him. Jaume explained that the group was reorganized to reduce direct interaction with the instructor, describing the move as a decision influenced by his mother’s role at the institute.
Efforts to obtain comments from IES Llopis Marí de Cullera and the Generalitat Valenciana’s Conselleria d’Educació were noted. The education director declined to comment during the early stages of the case, and at the time of publication, officials indicated that they would respond once the legal proceedings concluded. A subsequent written request for comment was sent, but no response had been received at the time of reporting.