Confirmation of sentence against Civil Guard for domestic abuse in Ibiza

In addition, the man is deprived of the right to possess weapons for two years, and is prohibited from approaching within 200 meters of the victim and the places he frequents, for the same period. On the other hand, the Court of Violence against Women of Ibiza has pending to resolve a request from the lawyer of the victim, Joan Cerdàfor the suspension of the visitation regime of the convicted person with his son.

Cerdà explains that he presented this request to the court upon learning of the sentence, but indicates that the court has not yet pronounced.The lawyer assures that, with the current legislation, it is not necessary to wait for the sentence to become final to suspend the visits. Likewise, in support of his petition, the lawyer defends that “due to the nature of the proven facts, the suspension of the regime is applicable”.

The facts that the first sentence considers proven and now confirmed by the Provincial Court, in a resolution signed by the court presided over by Judge Samantha Romero Adán, state that the man began a sentimental relationship with the victim in 2011, the year in which the only one was also born common child of the couple. The relationship began in Zamora, where the agent was stationed, and continued in Ibiza, where the woman’s parents lived and to which they moved when the child was “three or four years old,” the sentence describes.

The text points out that “already from the beginning of the relationship, the defendant began to show his extremely irascible characterthe judge’s letter, signed by the magistrate, judges that “her extremely irascible characterdominant over her, who had to please him in everything, which was increasingly difficult, as his level of demand” with the victim “came close to the impossible.

To accentuate the intimidation, the man, “instead of keeping the regulation weapon when he arrived home in a place that was not in sight, he left it on a shelf in the living room, even carrying it on his person.” The text states that the defendant would go so far as to sit on the sofa with the weapon which once went off in the house, “in the presence of her and the minor, so the three of them went to a medical center”.

The sentence points out that the woman “was gradually becoming aware of the hell she was living in”, but that “she was too afraid to denounce because of the defendant’s status as an agent of authority”. The victim decided to file a complaint when the defendant “kept telling her that he was going to take away her custody of the child”.

There are several ill-treatment that are collected in the sentence, which explains that the convicted person locked up the woman and the child in a room when they “annoyed him” or every time she did something he understood to be wrong. “Everything was a reason for him to insult her, from leaving a cup of tea on the table, to not liking how she placed the cutlery,” continues the brief, which includes several of the insults with which he continually vexed the woman, such as “retarded”, “fucking liar”, “disgusting” or “scoundrel”. “Anxiety, depression, maladjustment, low self-esteem and post-traumatic stress disorder”, were the emotional consequences of mistreatment received during the relationship.

The brief cites several specific situations of mistreatment. Thus, on one occasion the convicted prohibited the woman from continuing to use the carfor leaving it parked farther away from the curb “than he thought was right”, or that he denigrated her and broke dishes by throwing them on the ground when the food the victim prepared for him was not to his liking. “You’re not even good for cooking, you forget what your duties are,” he reproached her.

He also insulted her once when she had the dining room table occupied, as she was making the child’s carnival costume for school. Textually, the sentence states, he began to shout “what is this, a fucking shitty workshop? and where is my food?”. On a previous occasion, still pregnant, she wanted to decorate the baby’s room, to which her husband told her “that she was a slut for dirtying the wall”. She also imitated hera when she answered, “to the point that the child repeated the imitation made by the father”.

Another episode of mistreatment occurred once the convicted person returned home and began to hit the victim repeatedly with each of the pieces of laundry from the washing machine, in retaliation because it had not yet been hung out. “Similarly, on another occasion he took the tray out of the oven where he had made a pizza,” and because his wife “did not wash it immediately, he told her she was a slut.”

The husband manipulated her emotionally, it emerges from the text, which records that he told her that he was going to leave and see what she would do without him, she added. However, he also “told her that she was the one who had to leave home and go to her parents’ house, even though the house belonged to her uncle and they did not pay rent.