In Mojácar, near an Almería nightclub, the Supreme Court’s sentencing panel confirmed a four-year prison term for Santi Mina in connection with a sexual assault case from the early hours of June 16, 2017. Mina’s legal team had already signaled intent to appeal, aiming to secure admission to prison in the coming weeks as the appeal process moves through the higher courts.
The player’s legal team expressed disappointment with the Appeals Chamber’s ruling, arguing that the submission had not been fully explored. They participated in the proceedings and had reduced a compensation claim from 50,000 to 25,000 euros, a factor that could influence the appeal while the court maintained the same four-year sentence for sexual abuse.
The defense, led by lawyer Fatima Rodriguez, contended that the prior account of facts had been interpreted as if Mina acted within the law. The argument centered on a perceived excess of blame, suggesting a violation of accountability in Mina’s conduct, even though this did not change the offender category applied in the judgment.
Justice upholds Santi Mina’s four-year sentence
Special Chamber discussions concluded that the proven facts showed Mina used a legal framework to justify his actions, noting the confined space of the caravan where the incident occurred, described as narrow and awkward for the victim. The court found the accused faced a single, clear escape path, and the victim experienced shock at the moment of impact.
The prosecution, represented by Iván Bolaños, argued that removing the term supervising the notion of superiority from the sentence could prevent misinterpretations about the absence of consent, even when environmental pressure is implied as a form of dominance. This stance emphasizes that the victim’s lack of consent is central, regardless of surrounding circumstances.
Santi Mina won’t defend Celta shield again: club rushes transfer
Bolaños indicated plans to file an appeal before the Almería State Court within weeks. The precautionary detention aligns with the sentence, underscoring the need to prevent the convicted person from evading justice during the appeal process.
Economic and mobile capacity
The case also drew attention to Mina’s finances and mobility, noting his transfer last season on loan to Al Shabab in Saudi Arabia from Celta. As part of the discussions, the court considered factors relevant to his potential entry into a penitentiary regime and other logistical elements tied to his professional status.
Lawyers described the Appeals Chamber decision as solid, acknowledging that while the four-year term is upheld, the arguments offered by the prosecution did not lead to an escalation in penalties through aggravating factors.
“Money has never been our priority”
Regarding the compensation reduction, prosecutors acknowledged the difficulty of addressing non-pecuniary damages, but noted the court’s method for determining amounts based on comparable cases. They suggested that the compensation could rise to around 116,000 euros, a figure proposed earlier. The defense argued that financial considerations should not drive the outcome, and they indicated a willingness to assess compensation as appropriate in light of the evidence and the victim’s statements.
The TSJA rejected the grounds for appeal, stating that the Almería Court’s right to effective legal protection remained intact and that the judge’s assessment of the victim’s statements was fair. The chamber also noted some inconsistencies within the victim’s statements but confirmed credibility overall and the persistence of the allegations, even as new facts were added in subsequent statements.
“The Will to Remedial Action”
The Chamber rejected an appeal by the special prosecution and the Ministry of Finance seeking a higher penalty based on the notion of temporary behavior and the presence of a restorative intent by the defendant. The court reminded that the victim did not seek compensation during the proceedings and that the second part of the sexual abuse facts had been recognized in proven statements.
For compensation of non-pecuniary damage, the victim had requested an increase from 50,000 to about 117,000 euros, which was later reduced to 25,000 euros after considering proportionality, the act’s transient nature, and the victim’s initial wish not to claim damages. The court weighed the expert findings and the victim’s expressed wishes, ultimately applying a proportionality standard to determine the final amount.
Proven sexual abuse
The court found the sexual abuse in Mojácar in June 2017 to be established, supported by the victim’s detailed testimony during an oral hearing and corroborating statements from police and investigators. The prosecution’s evidence—together with a forensic report documenting extragenital and genital injuries—supported the claim, with psychological assessments indicating anxiety and depressive symptoms tied to the events. The victim’s daily life was notably affected, including chronic post-traumatic stress disorder linked to the incident.
The court highlighted the victim’s demeanor in statements and testimony, noting fear and distress shown during the process. Although Mina initially denied touching the victim, the eventual DNA findings and the evolving account led to a revised version that confirmed vaginal penetration. The proceedings, chaired by Judge Társila Martínez, emphasized the victim’s consistent story and the corroborating witness testimony, despite initial inconsistencies in early statements.
Overall, the court described the victim’s account as credible and persistent, reinforcing the factual basis for the four-year sentence and the recognition of the harm caused by the incident. This determination underscores the importance of protecting victims and upholding accountability in cases of sexual violence. [Cited: TSJA]