The clash between the judge and the Valencia Prosecutor for Minors in the face of the group rape denounced by a 12-year-old girl by four adolescents and another individual on a 13-year-old girl in Burjassot (both are friends) reached its peak in the afternoon -Friday night. It was at that moment when the Public Ministry slammed its fist on the table before the magistrate’s resolution.
The prosecutor reiterated his disagreement with the decision not to intern the perpetrators of the alleged sexual assault – another 18-year-old is wanted – and he did so through a resource whose content gives an idea of the nature of the events denounced by the girls.
As this newspaper has been able to learn, the Prosecutor’s Office warns in its letter that the events, it says, “are extremely serious” and fears that the aggressors – three of them 16 years old, one 15 and another 17 – may be considering the flight given, he warns, that the crimes they are charged with “carry very high penalties.” He also speaks of the “special vulnerability of the victims” given their young age.
The bankruptcy of the head of the Juvenile Court number 2 of Valencia caught the Public Ministry with the changed foot since, as the legal sources consulted maintain, shortly before the magistrate had verbally agreed to agree on the internments.
In fact, in his subsequent order, in which he imposes probation on them, he recognizes “rational indications of committing a crime” as well as “risk factors.” Likewise, the judge assesses the social situation of the five adolescents. As she collects in her car, she says that her “family educational style” is, she adds, “lax and permissive”, and warns of the “low internalization of the rules”, which is why she advises follow-up measures that she does not specify.
Given the “contradictions” between the versions of the girls and those of their aggressors, the magistrate has preferred to wait before sending them to a center. She considers, as stated in her order, that “it is not the procedural moment to adopt such a burdensome precautionary measure” such as internment in a closed regime center. Of course, she leaves the door open to being able to do so as the judicial investigation progresses.
The sexual assaults occurred, according to the complaint, in an abandoned house. The minors had stayed, through Instagram, with two boys. Apparently, one of the teenagers raped one of the girls, who managed to escape after the sexual assault.
Later, four other boys, friends of those who made the appointment, went to the semi-collapsed house and allegedly committed a gang rape on the other victim. One of them sounded the alarm by sending a very short video to a friend on WhatsApp, in which the floor of the abandoned house could be seen and a scream and some voices could be heard.
She assured that they entered voluntarily with the two boys they knew but that, despite the fact that they kissed, she did not give her consent to have sex and was forced, without being able to specify if the other minor gave it or was also attacked.
When the other four friends arrived at the house, she fled, hid and was able to see the group attack on the other minor and record the small alert video, according to her account. The girls agree that they did not give their consent to have sexual relations, contrary to what the adolescents maintain, and that they were forced.
The seriousness of the reported events led to the intervention of the Family and Women’s Care Unit (UFAM) of the National Police, whose agents believe they have collected evidence that the two minors were attacked, one of them in a group.
Conforms to The Trust Project criteria