Legal loophole in ‘only yes is yes’ law benefits La Manada

Legal loophole in ‘only yes is yes’ lawleading to reduced sentences for many sex offenders, which may also allow One of the members of La Manada raped a young woman in Sanfermines and Valdeluz school teacher who abused several underage children would see their sentences reduced Very soon. Minister of Equality, Irene Montero assures no one warned them of what could happen and this will happen when, as with the Penal Code reform in 2015, the prosecution issues an instruction that it will not support reductions in sentences already given as long as they are within the established penalty range. in the new law.. But the point is government withheld important information It finally arrived during the rule suspension and sold out like a victory.

lawyer packageAgustín Martínez will present a rObjection to the request for a reduced sentence for one of his clientsIn the implementation of the new law, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison by the Supreme Court of Appeals for rape, which continued for certain aggravating reasons, such as tormenting treatment and joint action of two or more people.

It was confirmed this Thursday in an interview on Canal Sur Radio by Martínez himself that he did not provide further details about the appeal he is currently working on, and that “in principle it will exclusively affect one of the convicts”.

Although the lawyer did not specify who could benefit from the appeal, the new ‘yes is yes only’ law could only allow in practice. Reducing Ángel Boza’s sentence by one yearHe was sentenced to 15 years in prison for group rape on Sanfermines in 2016. Four other young Sevillans were also sentenced to other penalties, such as the sexual abuse of Pozoblanco, and were unable to benefit from any reductions.

Martínez said during the interview that this reduction in the sentence was “completely possible because Minimum penalties lowered and the sentence handed down by the Supreme Court at the time noted that it effectively enforced the minimum sentence, and I understand that after changing the minimum sentence, it is more favorable to apply the current norm”.

La Manada’s lawyer rejected the criticisms of Montero, who defended the law, and attributed the reduced sentences to rapists to the fact that machismo “could cause the judges to apply the law incorrectly or incompletely”.

“There is a bad law based only on propaganda. and while the primary element that existed in the previous Penal Code was consent, it tried to deceive the public by marketing itself as a very positive reform that focused on the element of consent.

In her view, what has been done with the new Sexual Freedom Guarantees Act is “absolutely ridiculous”, for which she urged Irene Montero to explain “why all minimum sentences were lowered”, which she considers “inexplicable and”. It doesn’t make any sense to the point of “decriminalizing certain types of crime, no matter how scandalous”.

Valdeluz professor

Beyond commuting the sentence to a La Manada member, there are other possible and future troubling circumstances. And he is the former teacher of the Valdeluz school Andrés Díez requests the Madrid County Court to review the sentence as the author of twelve crimes, he definitively sentenced him to 49 years in prison. child sexual abuse Students who made commitments between 2002 and 2014 informed legal sources Europa Press.

Although it is a final decision from the Supreme Court, the retrospective implementation of the Penal Code reform in sexual crimes within the scope of the ‘only yes is yes’ law raises this possibility.

“Yes, it would be possible for the new law to be reconsidered if it benefits him because of the criminal retrograde principle,” the former teacher’s lawyer told Europa Press. Therefore, it does not preclude an examination of the sentence, in particular to assess whether the benefit of the remission can be applied.

The following statements were included in the court decision: the teacher took advantage of her closeness with her students “to touch them and satisfy their desires and sexual urges”.It starts with kisses, hugs, tickles, gradually up to touching, and gradually increasing over time, reaching the groin and vulvar area and the groin point, groping towards the inner thighs, back, breasts and buttocks.

He was convicted of twelve counts of sexual misconduct and his sentences are now combined with the offense of sexual assault, so there would be a substantial reduction if aid was applied.

Government withheld information

Be that as it may, discussion is served. In that sense andAccording to ABC, The government hid important documents from Congress in order to pass the “yes is yes only” law. same trap as ‘trans law’ Thus, the deputies did not know the majority of the objections.

And the thing is, at least five reports, including the report from the Judiciary, stand in the way of the new regulation on sexual crimes.

Special, CGPJwhich has already expressed its “most unequivocal refusal” to “intolerable attacks” He was very critical of the draft Law on the Comprehensive Guarantee of Sexual Freedom, against the judges examining the sentences.

And that’s it. The organization warned in its report, contrary to the draft: The “designed criminal framework” for sexual assault offenses “represented a reduction in the upper limit of some sentences” It also warned that “reducing the upper limits of penalties will require a review of the sentences, which are the maximum sentences under current legislation”.

Thus, the body has decided that judicial decisions that are known in recent days and that reduce the sentences given to sex offenders “strict application of these rules by members of the judiciary, subject only to the rule of law”.

“It is clearly stated in the text of the law that the maximum penalties have been reduced. Not only are previous sentences being reviewed, but it is worrying that the most serious acts of sexual violence will emerge in the future. will be punished with less pain,” stressed Pilar Sepúlveda, lawyer and CGPJ member.

Even in congressional debates and using the newspaper library, Spokespersons of various groups such as PP spoke of this risk.

Again, No one in the Ministry of Equality and the Government noticed or wanted to see it.enactment of the norm will lead to a reduction of penalties if not included. transitional provisionwhich is usual in these cases.

Montero says no one warned him

This Wednesday night The Minister of Equality, emphasizing that there was no one in the two years when the ‘only yes is yes’ law was enacted, revealed his ignorance of the law on this issue.neither the rest of the relevant ministries, nor the Financial Council, nor the Council of State, nor the CGPJ, warned possible revisions of penalties for changes introduced.

In an interview with Cadena Ser, Montero refused to admit faults with the norm, emphasizing that the reductions in sentences for sex offenders were made because of a misinterpretation by the judges of the “only yes is yes” law. because of his statement.

And he argued that throughout the entire debate before the law was passed, no one realized what it was, that the reduction of typical minimum sentences would turn into a downward revision of the sentences that had already been imposed.

Because, according to them, as with the Penal Code reform in 2015, they accepted this as natural when the prosecutor’s office issued an instruction stating that no reduction would be made unless the previously given sentences were reduced. the range of penalties established in the new legislation.

Moreover, He described CGPJ’s warning of what was going on as a “hoax” and a “lie”.as the judges’ governing body stated hours ago, as its recommendations were and were taken into account not to lower the maximum penalties (not to mention the minimum sentences).

What does the ‘only yes is yes’ law say?

standard introduced new conditions to aggravate penalties -such as canceling the will of the victim with drugs or drugs- but also lowered minimum penalties for some crimes: A minimum sentence of 4 years imprisonment is now foreseen for the rape accused, compared to 6 years in the previous Penal Code, and would be at least 6 years in comparison if the victim was younger than 16 years of age. before 8 pm.

However, experts consulted by the EFE warn that judges have little room to move because when examining a sentence it is not possible to go into the merits of the facts being tried, simply Calculate the penalty according to the most appropriate standard for the convict.

That is, if the attitude of the aggressor is not referred to as an abuse of superiority in the judgment of origin, which is now considered as an aggravating factor, the judges cannot take this into account in their corrections of sentence and if the court originally imposed the minimum penalty on the offender, it must now do the same, experts explain.