Collaborators AreaHate crime
Translation generated by AI. Access the original version
Discriminatory motivation is an essential element for the criminal classification of the offense
The Supreme Court (TS) has confirmed a conviction for hate crime in a case where a man insulted and humiliated another person with clearly racist and discriminatory expressions , in addition to threatening her. The key idea of the ruling is that, for this type of behavior to be punished as a hate crime, there must be a real discriminatory motivation , meaning that the attack is not "just a fit of anger" or any random insult, but an attack directed against someone for belonging to a protected group (for example, based on their race or immigrant status).
The events took place when the accused argued in a bar over one euro that he thought he hadn't received back correctly from a vending machine. From there, he directed insults like " shitty black " at the owner of the establishment, and escalated to threatening of death, even in front of police officers. In addition, he was carrying an object that simulated a weapon and made intimidating gestures, which led to his arrest and the victim's complaint.
The Valencia Provincial Court sentenced him for crime against fundamental rights (hate crime), and the Supreme Court confirms that sentence (and also another one for minor threats). The Supreme Court argues, among other things, that here the attack was not only against a specific person, but against what he represented , despising her and trying to exclude her for being "non-Spanish" and for her skin color . The Supreme Court emphasizes that in a democratic State verbal assaults have no place of this type based on exclusion and hatred of the "different".
In claims arising from criminal acts, our lawyers can provide you with the appropriate advice and defend your interests.CONTENIDO RELACIONADO
-
Crimes of misappropriation and fraud
Misappropriation of amounts delivered to complete a housing promotion The case revolves around a real estate promotion in Riogordo (Málaga), consisting of 20 homes, managed by a promoting company. In the first stage, two people were listed as joint administrators (although one of them handled the daily management). Between 2008 and 2009, several homes were sold and buyers delivered amounts on account. Some were even given the keys, despite the fact that the work was not actually finished (it was said to be 90% complete), no deed was granted, and the construction company ended up abandoning due to non-payments. The result was that buyers found themselves living in houses without deeds and without a clear situation in the Registry. Some time later, those administrators sold their shares and a third person entered as the sole administrator. This new administrator was aware of the previous problem, but still asked some buyers for additional money (for example, 8,000 euros) on the argument that it was to complete the promotion. The relevant point is that this money was not used for what was promised nor was it returned. Furthermore, between 2010 and 2011, new sales of homes occurred under similar conditions, and later the entire set of 20 homes was sold to another company, generating a serious conflict between those who had bought earlier and those who appeared later as titleholders. The Provincial Court acquitted the first two administrators (it was not proven that they had diverted the money), but convicted the last one for aggravated misappropriation and fraud. The Supreme Court (TS) confirmed the conviction and rejected the appeal as it did not accept reopening the evaluation of the evidence and considered the denial of new documentation correct because it referred to subsequent facts and was not relevant to what was judged.
-
Union law
The CJEU supports the Amnesty Law for normalizing the situation in Catalonia
-
Gender violence
Illegal detention and attempted homicide
This website uses both its own and third-party cookies to analyze our services and navigation on our website in order to improve its contents (analytical purposes: measure visits and sources of web traffic). The legal basis is the consent of the user, except in the case of basic cookies, which are essential to navigate this website.