The Provincial Court of Cantabria has sentenced two years and four months in prison to one woman for appropriating 36,200 euros that he extracted from the current account of the old woman to whom he ran errands. In a sentence released this Thursday and against which there is an appeal before the Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Cantabria, the court considers the accused perpetrator of a continuing crime of misappropriation to be done until thirteen money withdrawals “without the knowledge or consent” of the account holder.
In addition to the prison sentence, it imposes the payment of a compensation for civil liability amounting to 36,200 euros, the amount of improperly appropriated.
However, the Hearing cannot extend this crime to the previous period, in which the accused was not yet authorized in the account of the old woman, since, as explained by the bank employee at the trial, she herself called the old woman every time the woman involved was going to withdraw money to verify that the owner wanted to carry out the withdrawal.
He took advantage of the friendship with the old woman
According to the factual account of the sentence, the one now sentenced, “taking advantage of friendship” that he had with the old woman “derived from the fact that for years she was in charge of giving him the medication, running errands and managing the bank” and “with the intention of obtaining an illicit economic benefit and appearing as authorized in the bank account”, carried out between February 2018 and January 2019 various withdrawals of quantities, “without the knowledge or consent” of the owner.
The refunds were monthly, except in June, when two were carried out, and ranged from 1,000 euros that he took out twice, to 5,000 euros that he took out on one occasion. The total amount is 36,200 euros.
The court decision states that “there is no evidence that previously” as of the date the defendant became an account author extracted other amounts “without the knowledge, consent or express authorization” of the old woman, and neither that she “made her own amounts extracted by the accused that the bank employee gave her in an envelope.
The court has taken into account, among other evidence, the statement of this woman, who had been working for twenty years in the banking entity and he had known the old woman ever since; A statement that “has been decisive in temporarily limiting the commission of the crime of misappropriation.” The employee stated at the hearing that before the account holder authorized the accused, she was in charge of calling the old woman to confirm the operation.
“When I received the card with the DNI and the old woman’s piece of paper indicating the amount to be withdrawn, I called her personally to confirm said operation, so it must be understood that said confirmation by the account holder excludes, by application of the principle ‘ in dubio pro reo ‘, that we can declare proven that the defendant extracted, before the aforementioned authorization of the new account, the amounts actually withdrawn from the account “, explains the sentence.
The brother discovered “strange exits” of the account
It has also been considered the testimony of the old woman’s brother, who on one occasion asked the woman how much she paid the accused and she never answered, and again when she told her that she had to do will the defendant called him telling him to leave her sister alone. He also stated that one day he went to the bank and there was his sister’s card, in which there were some “strange departures”, and reported that she “doesn’t spend money” and that “she does not know anything about things at the bank because her husband was carrying everything” before his death. In the same vein, the forensic doctor confirmed to the court that the old woman “presented a cognitive impairment, it had no value of money and did not know the euro-pesetas equivalence“.
Faced with all this testimony, the court notes that the defendant’s statement “is not at all convincing” while he relates that he took money several times a month while acknowledging that the old woman barely spent about 200 euros a month. He also assured that at that time “he had many expenses”, among others, of a boiler, elevator or some works in the property. However, the court has been able to verify that such expenses “Not only have they not been accredited, but certification has been provided” of the administration of estates of the old woman’s house in which informs that there is no elevator and that there was no agreement to carry out any type of work in the property.
Therefore, the court considers the accused the author of a ongoing crime of misappropriation for the withdrawals made between February 2018 and January 2019, the date on which the account was canceled when the old woman’s brother learned of the “strange outflows” of money.