Post by account_disabled on Jan 10, 2024 5:34:10 GMT -5
The Fourth Section of the Provincial Court of Seville has confirmed the sentence of the 14th Criminal Court that acquitted the Betis footballer Rubén Castro for the alleged abuse committed against his former romantic partner.
In the sentence, sent by the TSJA, the court rejects the appeals of the Prosecutor's Office and the private accusation brought by the complainant against the acquittal sentence of July 27, 2017 after the trial held in May of that same year.
At the trial, the Prosecutor's Office requested four Binance App Users Data years in prison for the footballer for a crime of habitual abuse, one for minor threats and six for abuse in the family, while the private prosecution demanded eight years and nine months in prison.
The Court, in its resolution, recalls the doctrine established by the Constitutional Court to clarify that "it cannot, nor should, re-evaluate the evidence that was carried out before the trial court, much less compare the critical and evaluative process of that body with what could be our hypothetical proposal for evaluating the evidence (as on many occasions both resources seem to intend)".
"Nor will we be able to formulate factual hypotheses, even if we believe them to be possible or more probable than the one chosen by the magistrate a quo, but only to review whether that body, at the time of establishing the factual support of its resolution, has maintained or not within the limits of rationality, logic and the maxims of experience, as well as verifying that no means of proof that could be relevant to the conclusions have been unduly withheld," he adds.
The Public Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution requested the annulment of the sentence and the trial and, in a subsidiary manner, that the accused be convicted as the author of a crime of minor threats.
For the Court, the judge who issued the acquittal ruling "more than explicitly explains the reasons on which he is based for not attributing full criminal value to the testimony" of the complainant, so that "this probative value cannot be replaced by testimonies from whom only "They know what they heard" from the footballer's ex-partner.
He adds that these complementary testimonies "in addition, as the Public Prosecutor's Office finally admits, were not precise or concrete, which in any case can only contribute to casting greater shadows on the direct testimony", since "either the facts were not narrated to them with detail, either they were referred to in a confusing manner or the same version of what happened was not transmitted to them in a sustained and persistent manner.
In the sentence, sent by the TSJA, the court rejects the appeals of the Prosecutor's Office and the private accusation brought by the complainant against the acquittal sentence of July 27, 2017 after the trial held in May of that same year.
At the trial, the Prosecutor's Office requested four Binance App Users Data years in prison for the footballer for a crime of habitual abuse, one for minor threats and six for abuse in the family, while the private prosecution demanded eight years and nine months in prison.
The Court, in its resolution, recalls the doctrine established by the Constitutional Court to clarify that "it cannot, nor should, re-evaluate the evidence that was carried out before the trial court, much less compare the critical and evaluative process of that body with what could be our hypothetical proposal for evaluating the evidence (as on many occasions both resources seem to intend)".
"Nor will we be able to formulate factual hypotheses, even if we believe them to be possible or more probable than the one chosen by the magistrate a quo, but only to review whether that body, at the time of establishing the factual support of its resolution, has maintained or not within the limits of rationality, logic and the maxims of experience, as well as verifying that no means of proof that could be relevant to the conclusions have been unduly withheld," he adds.
The Public Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution requested the annulment of the sentence and the trial and, in a subsidiary manner, that the accused be convicted as the author of a crime of minor threats.
For the Court, the judge who issued the acquittal ruling "more than explicitly explains the reasons on which he is based for not attributing full criminal value to the testimony" of the complainant, so that "this probative value cannot be replaced by testimonies from whom only "They know what they heard" from the footballer's ex-partner.
He adds that these complementary testimonies "in addition, as the Public Prosecutor's Office finally admits, were not precise or concrete, which in any case can only contribute to casting greater shadows on the direct testimony", since "either the facts were not narrated to them with detail, either they were referred to in a confusing manner or the same version of what happened was not transmitted to them in a sustained and persistent manner.