A Patriarchal Trial
The Spanish justice system has shown its ugly chauvinistic head again. The woman may have been guilty of kidnapping her own children across international borders, which was the charge brought against her by her ex-husband, but not all information was taken into account, and her sentence was unusually harsh. Her own charge against him of abuse seems to have been lost on a desk somewhere in the Italian justice system and forgotten.
Once upon a time, in 2004, a woman from the province of Granada, met and married an Italian, Francesco Aucuri. In 2009, the husband is accused and found guilty of physically abusing the wife, and is sentenced to three months in jail. However, his wife forgives him and they move to Italy. But not everything is peace and love between them, and in 2016 the wife decides to visit her family in Granada and brings the children, 12 and 4, with her. Once in Spain, she says she's not going back, and files a charge against him of physical abuse. Apparently, forgiving an abuser is not enough to change him.
This is when things go curvy. While she is in her right to file a charge against her husband in Spain for something he did to her in Italy, he is also in his right to file a kidnapping charge against her for taking their children away to live in another country without his permission. Which is what he did. And this is where chauvinism begins to show itself. While his charge was dutifully filed and processed, hers was stalled. It was first stalled at the translator's office, where apparently it hadn't been received. She first presented her charge in July of 2016. It was eventually sent to the translator in March of 2017, only they never got it. It was re-sent to them in August of 2017. This time they got it and translated it and sent it back in 3 days. In November of that same year, the Italian Ministry of Justice sent a form letter acknowledging its arrival, and that's the last it's been heard of. It's still sitting on a desk somewhere in Italy.
But the husband's charge of kidnapping went full speed ahead from the beginning. In December of 2017, Juana is ordered to return the children to their father. Since there is no deadline on the order, she refuses to do so, alleging his physical abuse, which she denounced, and which is still pending. But in July of 2017, she is again ordered to return the children, this time definitively. Now, she goes into hiding, and her story is all over the place. Many people take her side, and even declare she's staying with them, as a way of helping to keep her safe. But, in August she decides (probably because her charge has finally been translated and is on its way to Italy) to turn them and herself in. The children are returned to their father in Italy, and she faces the charge of kidnapping in front of a judge.
This past week, the sentence was made public. Juana Rivas is condemned to five years of prison, six years of loss of parental custody, and an indemnization to her ex-husband of €30,000 for moral damages. The judge spoke harshly against her in his sentence, adducing that there was no visible indication of physical abuse, as she had alleged (not after so much time has passed), nor any condemnation of her husband since 2009 for it. He also declared that her use of the media in making her case public may very well have damaged the children and their well-being.
The judge who dictated sentence, however, seemed to have plagiarized part of his argument from another judge and another case. He deleted several paragraphs and copied others verbatim in which another judge declared that a parent is not guilty of kidnapping while he has custody (which Juana had) and that the interest of the minor is above any other consideration (which was not taken into account because her accusation of abuse against the father is still stalled, but was filed and not taken into consideration). He is also known for criticizing laws protecting women from male violence, saying that some men are demonized by such laws. In a trial against an insurance company over a young woman's scar, he ruled in favor of the company, saying that the scar would only be seen intimately, and that it was even a beauty asset. During Juana's trial, he dismissed her allegations of physical and psychological abuse by her husband in Italy, saying that if she was so abused, why didn't she go to the police in Italy?
Again we have another instance in a courtroom where the personal opinions and beliefs of a judge overrule the impartiality that is supposed to be present. So, Juana Rivas should have presented her charges in Italy rather than take her children out of the country. Yes, that complicated matters. But why weren't her charges against her husband rigorously filed and tracked? Why weren't they taken into account at her trial? Why weren't they taken into account when she was ordered to return her children? Is it that the word of a mother still doesn't count as much as the word of a father? It certainly seems that way, still.
Once upon a time, in 2004, a woman from the province of Granada, met and married an Italian, Francesco Aucuri. In 2009, the husband is accused and found guilty of physically abusing the wife, and is sentenced to three months in jail. However, his wife forgives him and they move to Italy. But not everything is peace and love between them, and in 2016 the wife decides to visit her family in Granada and brings the children, 12 and 4, with her. Once in Spain, she says she's not going back, and files a charge against him of physical abuse. Apparently, forgiving an abuser is not enough to change him.
This is when things go curvy. While she is in her right to file a charge against her husband in Spain for something he did to her in Italy, he is also in his right to file a kidnapping charge against her for taking their children away to live in another country without his permission. Which is what he did. And this is where chauvinism begins to show itself. While his charge was dutifully filed and processed, hers was stalled. It was first stalled at the translator's office, where apparently it hadn't been received. She first presented her charge in July of 2016. It was eventually sent to the translator in March of 2017, only they never got it. It was re-sent to them in August of 2017. This time they got it and translated it and sent it back in 3 days. In November of that same year, the Italian Ministry of Justice sent a form letter acknowledging its arrival, and that's the last it's been heard of. It's still sitting on a desk somewhere in Italy.
But the husband's charge of kidnapping went full speed ahead from the beginning. In December of 2017, Juana is ordered to return the children to their father. Since there is no deadline on the order, she refuses to do so, alleging his physical abuse, which she denounced, and which is still pending. But in July of 2017, she is again ordered to return the children, this time definitively. Now, she goes into hiding, and her story is all over the place. Many people take her side, and even declare she's staying with them, as a way of helping to keep her safe. But, in August she decides (probably because her charge has finally been translated and is on its way to Italy) to turn them and herself in. The children are returned to their father in Italy, and she faces the charge of kidnapping in front of a judge.
This past week, the sentence was made public. Juana Rivas is condemned to five years of prison, six years of loss of parental custody, and an indemnization to her ex-husband of €30,000 for moral damages. The judge spoke harshly against her in his sentence, adducing that there was no visible indication of physical abuse, as she had alleged (not after so much time has passed), nor any condemnation of her husband since 2009 for it. He also declared that her use of the media in making her case public may very well have damaged the children and their well-being.
The judge who dictated sentence, however, seemed to have plagiarized part of his argument from another judge and another case. He deleted several paragraphs and copied others verbatim in which another judge declared that a parent is not guilty of kidnapping while he has custody (which Juana had) and that the interest of the minor is above any other consideration (which was not taken into account because her accusation of abuse against the father is still stalled, but was filed and not taken into consideration). He is also known for criticizing laws protecting women from male violence, saying that some men are demonized by such laws. In a trial against an insurance company over a young woman's scar, he ruled in favor of the company, saying that the scar would only be seen intimately, and that it was even a beauty asset. During Juana's trial, he dismissed her allegations of physical and psychological abuse by her husband in Italy, saying that if she was so abused, why didn't she go to the police in Italy?
Again we have another instance in a courtroom where the personal opinions and beliefs of a judge overrule the impartiality that is supposed to be present. So, Juana Rivas should have presented her charges in Italy rather than take her children out of the country. Yes, that complicated matters. But why weren't her charges against her husband rigorously filed and tracked? Why weren't they taken into account at her trial? Why weren't they taken into account when she was ordered to return her children? Is it that the word of a mother still doesn't count as much as the word of a father? It certainly seems that way, still.
Comments
Post a Comment