The Criminal Court number 2 of Cartagena, in Murcia, Spain, has sentenced the director of the digital newspaper The Cartagena TribuneJosele Sánchez, to three years in jail, a fine of 3,000 euros (just over 3,200 dollars) and 15,000 in compensation (up to 16,000 dollars) for revealing personal data of the rape victim in the La Manada case (you can read more about the case here).
The alleged journalist, who believes that he was only exercising his freedom of expression, allowed himself to write an opinion article where he not only revictimized the young woman, but also published her name, surname, ID (national identity document), address and place of studies in an essay titled “I do not believe you”.
The terrible consequences of their actions
The sentence makes him responsible for a proven crime against moral integrity, as well as for the discovery and disclosure of “private data that affected the privacy of the victim.” As if that were not enough, Sánchez attached two photographs; one of these, which was part of the evidence that the young woman refused to see at trial because it was one of the moments of the attack.
As a result of the publication of the so-called opinion, the victim was forced to leave the country and pause her studies due to the threats, insults and photographic montages that she began to receive, which, in the words of the judge, caused her “anxiety generalized before the possibility of being recognized”.
A white glove slap
Despite the consequences that his actions caused him, Sánchez remained convinced that he was exercising his freedom of expression as a journalist in that article published in May 2018. However, the trial mediator masterfully silenced him by telling him the following:
Freedom of opinion ends when it comes up against the wall of respect for the honor and privacy of people and which translates into the prohibition of using insulting or vexatious terms or expressions. Freedom of expression does not entail a right to insult.
The expressions that have been transcribed in the account of facts are completely irrelevant to the submitted opinion and can only be reasonably explained from the intention of causing harm to the injured party.