It happened in mid-May, it coincided in time with another complaint of multiple sexual assault in Castellón and also with the approval, days later, of the law that regulates consent in Spain or the Yes is Yes Law. Five minors and one adult were identified by the also minor A. on the 16th for an alleged gang rape in the Valencian town of Burjassot. The five minors were arrested two days later and the judge ordered their supervised release and the removal of the minor.

The only adult was arrested this Wednesday but a defense brief presented yesterday and to which EL MUNDO has had access expands the complaint and requests that, of the six people involved, three stop being involved and one of them would be the last detainee who, until now, continues to be detained at the Paterna police station (Valencia), awaiting trial. In addition, if the defense request is accepted, three more people would join the process, of which it is currently unknown if they are adults or minors.

According to the sources consulted by this newspaper, they would be members of the same group of friends and the same neighborhood. In the defense brief, represented by Manuela Muñoz Sánchez (Vanguard Abogados), it can be read that “from the photographic identifications that were carried out on the day of the events, once reviewed with time and care, my client shows disagreement with some of them, as they already stated the day they were shown the photographs, because despite the fact that they expressed insecurity with some identifications, these manifestations are not included, so, in order not to cause unnecessary pain to those who have nothing to see, we proceed to clarify who he does recognize.

It should be remembered that the minor was 12 years old at the time of the events and that, days later, she turned 13; the same ones that her friend has with whom she went to Burjassot on May 16 to meet her, according to her statements, two of the defendants, L.C.S. and I.G.G. Thus, of the five young people who were cheered on leaving the City of Justice in Valencia by friends and relatives who claimed their innocence on May 20, two of them -J.V.P and J.M.G- would no longer be denounced by the minor who would have been the victim of multiple rape.

The other minor involved in the alleged sexual assault would have been raped but only by one of those involved. In relation to the minor A., ​​there is a medical report to which this newspaper has had access specifying, among other things, that “she refers back pain and bruises are observed in it after recent sexual assault”, as well as “lumbar ecchymosis related to with sexual assault”

In addition, in A.’s emergency room report dated May 17, it is stated that the reason is “sexual assault” and that “he had met two people of gypsy ethnicity”, that “the latter took them to an abandoned house where there were 8 more Roma people». “After arriving at the house, she reports that they sexually assaulted her friend first, being able to escape” and that “later they took her against her will, her arms and legs (…) as well as penetration by 2 different people without using protection,” according to the documentation. .

But yesterday’s letter warns that the victim “does not recognize J.V.P. as a participant in the events. (Photocomposition 12, photograph 6), photograph that is only signed by the minor and not ratified by her mother due to doubtful identification ». Nor does it “recognize I. F. C. (Photocomposition 17, photograph 3) [the only adult] as a participant, a photograph that is only signed by the minor and not ratified by the mother due to doubtful identification.” Nor does it “recognize J. M. G (Photocomposition 9, photograph 3) as a participant, a photograph that is only signed by the minor and not ratified by the mother due to doubtful identification.”

And an “identification parade for the next day 16 for F. C., M. M and D” is requested: The defense brief provides “three photographs obtained from public profiles where [the minor] does recognize some of her aggressors, specifically to F. C., M.M, and D., whose last name we do not know».

“Come on, champions!” It was just one of the phrases that the five minors initially detained heard when they were released on probation. A hundred people were waiting for them and one of them was even carried on their shoulders to the astonishment of the National Police agents deployed there. For minors who remain on probation, the defense of the alleged victim requests “internment in a juvenile center for six months with the possibility of extending it for another three months.”

Of the five detainees initially, two minors admitted having had sexual relations with both minors in a statement before the Prosecutor’s Office, but that they were consensual. A third assured that he had left when he saw what was happening, without participating, and another two denied having been in the abandoned house where the alleged attacks occurred.

On these minors, between 15 and 17 years old, there is also a restraining order decreed by the Juvenile Court. Two of them, those who respond to the initials L. and I., had met through the Instagram social network and, although they affirm that the sex they had was consensual, this would not exempt them from having committed a crime of sexual abuse, when dealing with minors under 16 years of age, it is considered that they cannot give any consent.

Furthermore, it so happens that although the versions of the girls do not coincide completely, they do coincide with regard to the gang rape of one of them, A. It was the other minor who sent a third friend a video through WhatsApp in which you could see an abandoned house and hear some voices. The two minors had come with two of the identified minors and, before the arrival of more young people, the latter managed to escape.

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria