Malaga town woman jailed for assaulting 70-year-old neighbour, death threats and causing damage to other residents' doors

The assault incident happened on 17 January 2023, when the defendant rang the victim's doorbell and kicked the door. When the elderly man opened to ask what was going on, she struck him several times.

One of these blows was to the head, with a bag containing a glass jar. The man's wife tried to protect him while she called the emergency services. "I'm going to kill you," the attacker shouted at them. The couple managed to lock themselves inside their home, but the attacks continued on the other side of the door.

The woman grabbed a screwdriver and scratched the wood. She then went to another flat, where the resident was watching her through the peephole. "Come out or I'll kill you," she snapped before causing damage to their door as well.

The man sustained a one-centimetre wound to the left parietal region, a facial abrasion measuring around six centimetres and another injury to his chin. He required first aid and a single stitch. It took ten days to heal and he suffered no lasting effects.

The following day, his wife received more threates when she opened the door to welcome a friend. The defendant was carrying a glass jar in one hand, hidden behind her back. The other woman managed to close the door in time and prevented physical injuries, but ended up suffering an anxiety attack. She had to go to the health centre, where she was given anti-anxiety medication.

The damage to the couple's door cost 145.20 euros and that to the other property was 120 euros. The couple did not make a claim for their injuries or for the damage. The other neighbour did.

The relationship between the couple and the defendant had already deteriorated before the afternoon of 17 January 2023. The ruling describes it as a "situation of unsustainable cohabitation", with insults, threats and banging on doors and communal areas.

The defendant had been convicted on numerous occasions for minor offences of criminal damage and threats, although these previous convictions did not count towards a record of reoffending.

The provincial court's ruling from 3 June 2026, besides the prison sentence, confirms the fines for two minor offences of making threats and another minor continuing offence of causing damage. Each carries a sentence of three months, with a daily rate of ten euros.

The court of appeal has, however, amended the restraining orders. The court that heard the case had set a minimum distance of 200 metres. The judges have reduced this to ten metres because the defendant and the victims live in the same building.

The restraining order and the ban on contacting the 70-year-old man remain in force for two and a half years. The measures imposed in relation to the threats are limited to six months. According to the ruling, this is the maximum for minor offences and the court has corrected the two-and-a-half-year period initially set, not in accordance with the principle of legality.

The defence requested that the trial be set aside, stating that the defendant had waived her right to a court-appointed lawyer. The court rejected this argument on the grounds that no express waiver had been established, nor did it accept that the evidence had been misinterpreted. It upheld the assessment of the witness statements, the A&E report and the police report.

Another argument the defence held concerned the defendant's mental impairment. The defence relied on a discharge report from A&E and on the assessments of certain witnesses. In the court's view, these elements did not demonstrate how her mental faculties were affected at the time the events took place.

The ruling states that it is the responsibility of forensic doctors to report on this matter and that their assessment cannot be replaced by "mere subjective observations from those lacking medical knowledge".

The court also rejected the request for a report from Social Services to prove her vulnerability. It explained that the documentation regarding income, disability and housing could have been provided earlier and that the court should not have to make up for this lack of diligence.

An appeal may be lodged before the Supreme Court.

Read comprehensive local news from the Axarquía