Today we continue our tale about the ordeal that Spanish men face under the Gender Stalinist regime of Ley Contra la Violencia de Género (Organic Act of Integrated Protection Measures against Gender Violence) and the radical feminists supporting it. These are the same radical feminists who have quite literally occupied almost all institutions in Spain (both State institutions and private ones – particularly the media).
Part II of the report is about what happened in Spain between 2004 and 2012, a report issued by the Asociación de Víctimas de la Ley de Violencia de Género Madrid (The Association of the Victims of the Gender Violence Law – Madrid) along with another association called Feminist Association for Equality (FEMII).
Part II
ANALYSIS OF THE RECENTLY FIGURES PUBLISHED
On 21 November 2012, Ms. Inmaculada Montalbán, Chairperson of the Observatory against Gender Violence of the CGPJ, presented figures following nearly eight years of implementation of the gender violence law.
In the report, Ms. Montalbán states that the figures raise great cause for alarm. She addresses the work of courts specializing in gender violence and their aim to end impunity of male culprits by achieving an 80% conviction rate. If we analyze the figures carefully, we see a heavy bias in the manner the information is presented.
For example, her report shows the number of reported domestic violence related crimes as 1,034,613 (alleged crimes 963,471 and alleged misdemeanors 71,142). She repeatedly refers to “crimes” rather than “alleged crimes”, assuming that these allegations have all been substantiated. She then provides the number of convictions at 207,997, mixing crimes with misdemeanors, which constitutes just 20.1% of the total cases reported leading to conviction.
So what happened to the remaining 826,616 cases? 706,568 of the cases were dismissed. 120,048 end in acquittal. If we add this to the number of complaints that were retracted, the result is that from all the reported cases, 79,90% of the men reported to the police suffered: arrest (most of them), loss of home, loss of access to children and home, financial ruin, loss of property/pension, as well as having to pay the mortgage on their own home in which they could no longer live, marginalization and social stigma to be called and considered abusers even before judgment, resulting in psychological strain that can result in depression and suicide in some cases. There is no public official way to know how many men have finished with their lives because of this situation. Then these men, after suffering all this terrible chain of events following the report by their ex partner, are found not guilty or innocent, but the damage has already been done, and no compensation is offered, as official, “false complaints” do not exist.
Note that in the Courts of Violence against Women, 100% of the convictions are under compliance, that is to say that the accused is given a choice, for example, 30 days of social work and a course of rehabilitation, or a jail term of between six months and two years, and the accused men have accepted the lesser sentence rather than to continue to defend their innocence. Given this situation, not knowing that their compliance carries a criminal record and a hypothetical new complaint involving a jail sentence, the accused detainee accepted social work with the aim of ending the case.
WHAT TYPE OF CRIME IS REPORTED?
Given the data issued by Ms. Montalbán, it is noteworthy that nearly 80% are for offences related to Article 153 of the criminal code relating to causing mental suffering, or mistreatment without causing physical injury. This means that a simple argument involving harsh language, even where the man says something like “you’ll find out!”, etc., is reason enough to report a gender crime, but only if the complainant is a woman. Only 5% of complaints are made under Article 148 of the Criminal Code, which provide for severe cases of abuse. What is occurring in Spain is the criminalizing of men for trivial conflicts in the home.
In our association we come across cases where men have been convicted for flatulence during a discussion, or of causing the partner abuse via “telepathic” means, or simple by the man losing patience and reverting to the use of the “f” word. Although it seems utterly ridiculous, we assure you that in the case of gender violence, truth is stranger than fiction. You can find a wide range of these examples at www.projusticia.com.
CONCLUSIONS
An analysis of the official Spanish government figures raises two issues: first, in 826,616 cases between 2005 and 2012, the accused, all men, were found to be innocent. And, second, the vast majority of the complaints were based on Article 153 of the Criminal Code, namely that the woman reporting had not suffered any physical harm. For these and other reasons most of the arrests made, almost a million, during these 7 years, could be considered illegal:
Article 104 of Spain’s Constitution requires the Police to act as guarantor of the rights and freedoms of citizens and, in particular, to protect victims of crime, and article 24.2 that guarantees the presumption of innocence. Also, as previously pointed out, international law also guarantees the presumption of innocence, as article 14.2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 6.2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
A large number of risk assessments conducted after allegations of gender violence resulted in “Undeterminable risk”. In Instruction 5/2008 of the SES, it says that “in this case the Police will act with the same measures, operational and care, as for any other type of complaint “. So, acting on a complaint without basis or foundation would not be justified and would contravene Instruction 12/2007 of the SES, the technical regulation No. 1/2008 issued by the DAO on Procedures for the Civil Guard units on Gender Violence, which specifies, that to act, there must be a serious risk to the victim.
Complaints must be substantiated by the Protocol for security and Police forces, including coordination with the courts to protect victims of gender violence. Furthermore, the law and the above instructions do require an investigation of the victim, in order to provide accurate and sufficient evidence of the alleged abuse, since the mere word of the complainant, without supporting evidence, is insufficient. Acting with the excuse of protecting the complainant, without signs of abuse or an accompanying risk assessment, is illegal, unfair and unjustified and could lead to accusations of illegal detention under Article 167 of the Penal Code.
Obviously, to this must be added the provisions of the Judicial Police Manual .
We recall that all of this legislation is available on the Police intranet, so that in case of a complaint to the Police, no one can claim ignorance or lack of information.
POSSIBLE CAUSES OF ERRONEOUS INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE LAW BY SOME MEMBERS OF SECURITY FORCES
Some agents acted illegally for several reasons: misinformation and fear of being responsible if the accused later assaulted the alleged victim.
The Secretary of State for Security should issue a Technical Instruction to clarify to agents when it is appropriate, when not to arrest and to clarify the legal foundations of those situations. In addition, officers and NCOs should be trained more rigorously, to ensure that agents know correct procedure.
In an official document of the Ministry of Interior, an Action Protocol for the Coordination of Security Forces, advocates that in reviewing cases relating to the Gender Violence Law 1/2004, Integral Protection Measures against Violence Gender, they did not find a single reference to the word “alleged”, thereby assuming the presumption of guilt on all the men that had been reported. These suspects were often called “criminals” in the absence of conviction or official judgments.
Remembering the statistics given earlier, all the men reported were considered to be guilty first, yet only 10% of cases resulted in criminal convictions.
COMPREHENSIVE MONITORING SYSTEM IN CASES OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
In the Bibliography section of the report there are so-called professionals listed that should not have been involved in national domestic violence programs. Two of these are recognized Radical feminists Beauvoir and Firestone. This is a duo whose books, far from promoting peace and equality between men and women, support a form of social engineering, promote female superiority and push hatred between men and women.
We also find listed the author Jorge Corsi, who has supported Spanish radical feminism to implement gender ideology in society, and who has been convicted in his home country, Argentina, for pedophilia. It is inappropriate that this “author” remains as recommended reading for Police agents.
The criminal record as a pederast, and methodology to capture victims of Jorge Corsi is available on Google.
Finally, there is a strong political root to Spain´s Gender Violence law, one based on the pre-election campaign of José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who came to power earlier in the same year that law came into force.
There are many reports from the Spanish Press of Mr Zapatero visiting many women´s groups and giving favourable support to their aim of having their “own Court for Women”, and given that in Spain there are more women than men, feminist groups held a special appeal for Zapatero in his aim to raise votes.
Literature recommended:
- The Dictatorship of Género (Violence against Women). (ex-Judge, Francisco Serrano 2012)
- I A Social Engineers To Destroy Love (Rafael Palacios 2012)
- Femicide or Self-Construction of Women (María Stephen Prado and Félix Rodrigo Mora 2012)
- 400 International Reports Prejudice Against a www.escorrecto.org (J to L Alvarez Deca)
- All legal/police protocols and instructions referred to in this article.
- Legislation alluded to in UN and European policy.
Reference sources:
EP article with statements from Immaculate Montalbán, “Balance of seven years after the creation of the Courts of Violence
General Council of the Judiciary, Author: Observatory against Domestic and Gender Violence (Spain), “Balance of seven years after the creation of the Courts of Violence against Women
