The tragedy of N. marks a new step in the struggle of Spanish justice against gender violence. After analyzing the case of this woman, who suffered a brutal beating by her partner in the early hours of October 2, 2014, the Supreme Court has ruled that there can be no doubt about the veracity of the testimony of a victim of sexist violence for the fact that it has been slow to denounce or because, as he tried to argue the defendant's defense in this proceeding, the mere existence of mistreatment may condition him to lie against his aggressor.
This decision of the magistrates reinforces, therefore, the value as proof of the testimonies of this type of victims. "It is obvious that, due to being victimized by the aggressor, the woman does not have a good relationship with him, but this should not lead us to doubt the question of whether what she is declaring does with resentment motives. ", stresses the Criminal Chamber of the high court in a ruling on April 2, which considers Moakdy Juan García Sánchez, a couple of N., guilty of a crime of injury.
According to the resolution, which also imposes a 500-meter restraining order for five years, the man repeatedly beat the woman until she was unconscious. It all started with a discussion between three and four in the morning. At that time, N. was sitting on the sofa in the house where they lived and "he wanted to go out and sell drugs." But she refused. And, then, the beating began. Garcia Sanchez grabbed her by the arms, threw her to the ground and slapped her. In the middle of the aggression, she managed to take refuge in the bathroom and lock herself in it. "But he pounded on the door until he managed to open it and hit him with a punch that knocked him unconscious." The blow broke a tooth, "the magistrates of the Supreme Court said in their letter, where they reduced the sentence imposed to two years and six months in prison. -Front to the four years and six months imposed by the Provincial Court of Malaga- for undue delay.
Even so, despite this reduction in sentence, the judges mark in this sentence a line to follow in the legal fight against sexist violence, by reinforcing the credibility of the victim in his statement. In that sense, they consider that their testimony can not be doubted for refusing, at first, to make a complaint: "This reaction is common in victims of gender violence," explains the Criminal Chamber, which insists on who are "reluctant" for multiple reasons: for not knowing what will happen to them, for the subsequent reaction that the aggressor may have, for lack of financial means … In fact, in the case of N., she was a friend who helped him and convinced him to go to the doctor the next day: "This reinforces his neutrality and does not lie to the court when he recounts what happened before the succession of blows that Garcia Sanchez gave him," the Supreme adds.
Moreover, the magistrates have an influence on this idea: "They can not be turned against them if they delay in reporting, because they even feel stigmatized for doing so, and in many cases even guilty. , because they are of the aggressor and they are, also, of the own system in whom, in many occasions, they do not trust if they do not have the security that to denounce is going to be something positive for them and not something negative ".
Garcia Sanchez's lawyer also stated in his appeal that N.'s statement should be questioned because, because he could be mistreated, he could be moved by resentment to harm him. An argument discarded by the Supreme Court: "In relationships when there have been serious problems between them, it is obvious that the relationship they maintain is not good, and even worse, when there has been abuse, but this does not have to mean that in the declaration of the victim it is understood that always and in any circumstance there is a doubt about his credibility ".