A year in prison for breaking a conviction of abuse and harassment by a lack of.
The Third Section of the Murcia Provincial Court confirmed a ruling by the Criminal Court Number 4 of Murcia condemning B. for the crime of breach of conviction and a lack of bullying, with the concurrence of the aggravating circumstance of recidivism, crime, and sentenced to one year in prison and disqualification for the right to stand for.
Just, star trek online gold, as six days of work for the benefit of the Community and the prohibition to approach his former girlfriend at his home and place frequented by her, with a minimum distance of 300 meters and communication with her by any means or process, for six months, by the absence, with payment of costs, says a sentence according to, tera gold, which Europe has had access Press.
In particular, the Criminal Court Number 4 of Murcia issued a ruling in April 2009 in which it declared that the dndant tested, 42 years, had already been convicted firm October 2, 2008, the Domestic Violence Court Gender is not one of Murcia, on charges of injury to the sentence, including 16 months of prohibition to approach a, star trek online gold, minimum distance of 300 meters and communication with whom was his girlfriend for seven years and with whom he has two children, minors.
While in March 2009, in contempt of the court decision, the accused went to the woman in a cafeteria stating "I do not like to talk to these people," so the woman turned to the meeting, together with their children, being chased by the individual who seriously insult women in the presence of children.
The accused has also been convicted in final judgments of April 9, 2007, on charges of driving under the influence of alcoholic beverages, to which is added the final decision of December 16, 2008 the Criminal Court No 4 of Murcia, for the crime of conviction or breach of injunction, for the same victim, the penalty of imprisonment, which was replaced by work for the benefit of the community. Judgement was appealed.
Finally, the Board confirms the sentence, as it is, he explains, "the victim's statement has remained unchanged throughout the procedure, do not appreciate any internal contradiction in the story of the alleged incident, also backed such testimony appears, so as to the appellant-dndant, but rather raised the hypothetical possibility that women were motivated by other interests other than the accused. "