COURT FINDS EX HUSBAND NOT GUILTY OF MULTIPLE RAPE OF WIFE BECAUSE IT CONSIDERED THAT THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT INTIMIDATION OR VIOLENCE USED TO CARRY OUT THE SEXUAL VIOLENCE. THE JUDGES REDUCED THE ACCUSED´S SENTENCE ON APPEAL AND FOUND THAT ALTHOUGH THE SEX WAS ´UNDESIRED IT WAS STILL CONSENSUAL´.
Date: 22 July 2010
Judges: Mr. José Manuel de Paúl Velasco, Ms. Margarita Barros Sansinforiano, Mr. Carlos Luis Lledó González
A man accused of raping his wife twice in one night had his sentence reduced from 17 years and 9 months to 4 years and 9 months on on appeal. Despite the fact that the Court found the victim´s testimony to be credible and that there was a previous restraining order against the accused which he breached, the Court found that the rape had not been proven given that she ´passively allowed him to have sexual relations with her twice´.
The Court stated that although he had insulted the victim and had grabbed her by the arms and the neck, these acts were not carried out as a part of the rape but instead to ´leave marks on the victims so that supposed or real lovers of the woman would see the bruises´. It held that the intercourse was undesired but it must be considered consensual since she failed to resist and allowed her former husband to have intercourse with her to´ calm him down´given that he continued to insult her all through the night.
The Court placed emphasis on the lack of violent resistance by the victim and stated that however sad or difficult the situation was for the woman, it could not be considered to be a crime of rape. He was convicted or domestic violence and other violent acts carried out on the victim.