The Supreme Court has confirmed the 14-year prison sentence of José Enrique Abuín Gey, alias El Chicle and author of the murder of Diana Quer, for raping one of his sisters-in-law in January 2005, when she was 17 years old.
The Criminal Chamber rejects Abuín’s appeal against the sentence of the Court of A Coruña that convicted him of a crime of sexual assault and ratifies, in addition to the prison sentence, the prohibition of communicating with the victim for 22 years, as well as such as the payment of compensation of 30,000 euros.
The events occurred on January 17, 2005 when, after calling the victim twice to tell her that he wanted to return money to his father, he showed up in front of her house and convinced her to get into his car, “claiming that they would go and collect that money.”
After that, he “drove at high speed” to the San Mamede park, in the Lousame Town Hall, where the San Lourenzo chapel is located, “in a forest environment” that is “very little frequented.”
Once there, the convicted man “took out a large knife and showed it to the victim, while passing it to him as a warning of its possible use near the body.” Shortly after, and with the knife “always in his hand,” he told her to perform fellatio on him, to which the minor refused.
Then, he asked her to undress, gave her a nightgown to put on, and, “keeping the knife in his hand and close to the minor’s body as a threat,” he raped her.
Afterwards, he told her that if she told anyone what happened “he would kill her, her sister and her sister’s daughter, who was also his daughter, in addition to killing himself.”
El Chicle proposed in its appeal that quasi-prescription be applied, to reduce the penalty, because the case was initially filed in 2005 and was not reopened until 2018, but the Supreme Court rejects it because the fact that “the dismissal was ordered and then the reopening the case cannot, by itself, entail quasi-prescription.”
“There is no use by the victim of the time of the procedure to use them extrajudicially, either to harm the accused, or to obtain benefits of any kind,” explains the Chamber.
What happens, the resolution adds, is quite the opposite, since the victim communicated the events to a friend almost immediately after they had occurred and reported them the next day.
Later, when the investigations were discontinued, she had to endure the presence of her brother-in-law in the family unit to which she was reintegrated, forcing the victim to endure not only the denial of the rape but also the accusation of having lied to the family. a false complaint.
“That is, the damage was for the victim, who cannot be held responsible for the dismissal or reopening, and who used it for a spurious motive,” the magistrates state.
