The Chamber also considers accredited the sexual assault on one of the victims to whom he recorded videos and took photographs while carrying out sexual practices
The Supreme Court has confirmed the sentence of 28 years and two months in prison for the San Sebastian photographer Kote Cabezudo for sexual assault, abuse and child pornography of seven models in Guipúzcoa.
The Criminal Chamber has handed down a sentence that rejects the photographer’s appeal against the resolution of the Provincial Court of Guipúzcoa that convicted him of a crime of asexual assault, another of sexual abuse, six of child pornography and two of scam.
Besides, the court ratifies the payment of compensation of 116,000 euros to the victims and remember that the maximum effective term in prison is 20 years.
The ruling explains that in this case the application of the law of the only yes is not appropriate, which, in any case, would be innocuous, since even with the reductions interested by the convicted person, his maximum compliance in a penitentiary center would not vary.
In his appeal, the photographer denied the existence of the crime of child pornography, alleging that the parents of the models knew about their professional work given their social recognition in San Sebastián, and that, with their express and prior consent, the photographs were taken from an artistic point of view and without any sexual purpose, but merely sensual and aesthetic.
But the court answers that the photographs, not only nudes but more intimate close-ups directly affect the definition of child pornography.
“The primarily sexual purpose blurs any professional or artistic connotation”adds the Chamber.
This purpose is also ratified, the Chamber specifies, when similar photos are found on web pages run by the defendant with the warning: “Legal notice: All models are over 18 years old.”
The Chamber also considers accredited the sexual assault on one of the victims to whom he recorded videos and took photographs while he was carrying out sexual practices.
It indicates that “whether there is a contract or not, manifested his position to the sexual relationship even though he initially consented, ignoring it, with acts of force overcoming the physical pressure with which he tried to remove him, even though he was the director of the filming and that he had consented to the acts, does not distort the sexual assault that is the object of the condemnation”.
Another of the sexual abuse, yesIndicates the sentence, another model suffered it who was photographed naked and to whom the photographer inserted his fingers into her genitals.
“It is true that the model continued to go to the photo shoots, but she also showed her opposition to these touching, verbally and materially. Neither did they previously agree to this introduction of fingers, nor can it be understood that she consented to it, but rather showed her opposition to that practice, despite which, the defendant carried it out “conclude the magistrates.