A Lugo court has just dictated a car in which it concludes that it is not a crime to record women as they urinate on public roads and then hang them on pornography websites. The judge of first instance and instruction number 1 of Viveiro issued this resolution within the framework of an investigation by the recordings to more than 80 women at the parties of A Maruxaina of the town of Cervo in 2019.The last March this same judge Pablo Muñoz Vázquez, provisionally filed the open cause after the complaints of more than 80 of those women who detected that they had been recorded in the aforementioned Romería and then appeared published on the Internet, some in payment pages. Its decision caused a great commotion, deriving in a multitudinarian demonstration of protest in Lugo and reform and appeal resources were presented by several women complainants. Now, in a car this month of September, dismisses all those resources and confirms Your previous decision. Against the criterion of the complainants and the prosecution, he does not see in this behavior of making clandestine recordings and then disseminating them or crime against intimacy nor against moral integrity. The judge does not appreciate offense against the entity because the recordings were performed “In full public via and not a private space and reserved for the knowledge of other people” and he does not see that he is not attempt against the moral integrity of the persons recorded because “the tremendous mood of breaking the physical and moral resistance is not appreciated” of the same. The judge appoints prior jurisprudence of the provincial audiences of Jaén, Seville and Pontevedra stated that, in order for it to be considered a crime, it should be the “clandestine placement of filming devices or transmission of the image in places Closed and private “or also of the” employment of the aforementioned technical artists to record at a distance and from outside what happens in such EC locations Rral “.
Faced with these affirmations, the judgments that the judge of Viveiro conclude that “the clandestine or unconsonsant obtaining of images in public places or outdoors” can not be punished by the criminal way, that is, it is not a crime, but that “must Having an extra criminal response “and addressed by civil track.Al, argues the capture of images in public places could obtain protection in the Organic Law 1/1982, civil protection of honor, intimacy and its own image, but not It is up to a criminal matters to analyze whether the denounced behavior can be a crime according to civil norms of protection of intimacy and the image itself. Regarding the crime against moral integrity, the judge resorts to a resolution of the Supreme Court that requires that so that this crime should be considered should be created in the victims “feelings of fear, anguish and inferiority, susceptible to humilialling them, to wrapping them and to break in his case his physical resistance and dwelling “. Considers that in this case, no one of these characteristics is given. The resolution is not firm and some of the parties in the case have already announced the presentation of appeal before the provincial audience of Lugo to land the decisions of the Judge instructor.
