The case of the wife of the abuser from Seville who changed sex after being sentenced to 15 months in prison for repeatedly attacking her partner has returned to the Court of Violence against Women No. 2 after he withdrew from it when he understood that he had already I was not competent. Although the Prosecutor’s Office argues that it is irrelevant who decides on the case because the proven facts are not altered, the ruling of the Court of Instruction No. 15 of Seville maintains that Violence against Women is the body that has to decide on the appeal presented. for the defense of the victim.
The injured party denounces that Cándido, now Candy, father of her children, “says he is a woman but continues to lead the same life as a man.” He “makes fun of Justice” and “laughs at everyone”, the only thing he wants with this maneuver is “not to go back to prison.” Rosa’s defense – fictitious name – has already filed an appeal against the judge’s order for “fraud of law.”
For his part, the lawyer of the abuser, who has been firmly convicted, assures that she has always “felt like a woman” and the “only mistake” she has made has been “growing up in a society in which she has been inhibited for a long time, without power.” express their true sexual condition.
«The day the Trans Law was approved he saw the light at the end of the road and 15 days after its approval he went to the registry to change his gender. She only made her wish to become a woman come true and the law protected her for the first time. “She has not taken this important step simply to get out of jail,” her defense maintains.
Back to the gender violence judge
Now, after a new complaint against Cándido, this time for domestic and gender violence, injuries and abusethe head of the Court of Instruction No. 15 of Seville has issued an order returning the case to Court No. 2 of Violence against Women after an appeal presented by the victim’s lawyer and a letter from the Prosecutor’s Office in which The powers in this case are clarified.
The Violence Against Women Court sent the case to Investigation, which in turn sent it to No. 15 to continue with the proceedings. The judge considered that “given the personal circumstances of the litigants”, it is the Public Ministry that has to decide where this matter ends.
And the prosecutor understands that the change of sex of an abuser does not determine who judges him: “The change of competent body for investigation and the change of nomenclature (gender violence for domestic violence) does not imply any legal advantage or benefit for the abuser.” “alleged author, nor a loss of rights for the victim.”
The complainant’s lawyer has been warning that the sex change represents “a fraud on the law” so that the case is addressed by a conventional court and not by one of violence against women, with what this entails in terms of penalties.
For this reason, he emphasizes in his appeal for reconsideration before the court itself that article 46.3 of Law 4/2023 guaranteeing the rights of LGTBI people literally provides that “the rectification of the registry mention relating to sex and, in its case, the name change will not alter the legal regime that, prior to the registration of the registry change, was applicable to the person for the purposes of Organic Law 1/2004, of December 28, on Comprehensive Protection Measures against Gender Violence.
The Court of Violence against Women No. 2 explains that “the new wording given by article 44 of Law 1/2004, on Comprehensive Protection Measures against Gender Violence, establishes that the objective jurisdiction, in the criminal field of the Judge of Violence against Women, will extend to the investigation of crimes committed against whoever is or has been the wife or woman who is or has been linked to the perpetrator by a similar emotional relationship, as well as descendants, minors or incapable persons who with “they live together or are subject to power, when an act of gender violence has also occurred.”
“Therefore, and by express will of the legislator, who otherwise would have included them, possible crimes or minor crimes of which persons other than those mentioned are active or passive subjects are excluded,” the court argues, concluding that “the The sex of the person reported has changed, and is now a woman, which is why the preliminary proceedings sent due to lack of objective jurisdiction must be inhibited, with referral of the same to the Investigative Courts of Seville.
