Mental health
Bullying in Malaga: three minors sentenced for harassing, humiliating and isolating classmate
The victim was subjected to mockery and belittlement for months, which led to serious psychological harm that affected their personal, academic and social life
The provincial court of Malaga has convicted three teenagers of degrading treatment to which they subjected a classmate in the city.
They told her she ... was not allowed to speak or express her opinions, mocked her when she read aloud in class and asked other pupils not to associate with her or invite her to celebrations.
For months, the teenager had to endure this treatment at school. The humiliation, the taunts about her sexual orientation and the isolation caused her serious psychological harm.
The court has handed down a ruling that requires the defendants to do 70 hours of community service and compensate the victim with 7,00 euros. The provincial court has dismissed the appeal against the juvenile court's ruling in its entirety.
The bullying happened during the 2023-24 academic year. The judgement describes individual and group behaviour consistently directed against the same classmate: ridicule in front of the class, orders to prevent her from speaking and public comments. The teenagers went so far as to expel her from the group because of her change in attitude and encouraged others to exclude her from gatherings and celebrations.
The judges asked that the age of those involved and the setting in which it took place be taken into account. "We cannot view the behaviour that has been proven from an adult's perspective," they stated. The behaviour constituted humiliating treatment that undermined the girl's dignity and self-esteem.
The defence questioned the sufficiency of the evidence, the alleged involvement of each defendant and the application of article 173.1 of the criminal code, relating to degrading treatment causing serious harm to moral integrity. It also contested the grounds for the measures and the amount of compensation.
The court rejected these arguments, considering that acts which, taken in isolation, might constitute a minor offence take on greater significance when they are repeated over time and subject the victim to ongoing humiliation.
According to the defendants' lawyer, the presumption of innocence was breached. The lawyer holds that other minors were involved but were not charged because they were under 14. "We have never denied the psychological harm suffered by the girl. Whether these three boys and girls were responsible for it is a more debatable matter," he stated.
The victim's account
The court has upheld the credibility of the teenager's account, which it considers to have remained consistent throughout the proceedings. The ruling reports no contradictions nor any motives of revenge or resentment established. The victim's testimony was, furthermore, corroborated by other evidence.
A classmate confirmed that the girl had told him about the problems she was facing. Several teachers explained that they had seen her looking "sad" and the IT teacher confirmed that he had received an email asking him to remove her from the group of pupils under investigation. None of them directly witnessed the bullying, the court acknowledges, but their statements provided evidence that supported the complaint.
Another piece of evidence that was disputed was the testimony of a National Police officer who had visited the school to give a talk on bullying. According to his statement, one of the teenagers admitted to him that they had bullied the pupil. The lawyer questions the use of these statements in the trial because the minor was not warned of the consequences they might entail.
Although the teenager denied this admission at the hearing, the police officer stood by his account. The judges accepted his account as credible.
The forensic assessment corroborated this evidence. It did not identify the perpetrators, as the defence claimed, but it did confirm serious psychological harm consistent with the allegations made. It highlighted a "significant impact on a personal, academic and social level" resulting from a situation that had persisted over time.
The court also refused to examine each incident in isolation. The victim identified the three as having fostered that atmosphere and the court considers their involvement to have been proven. Some of the conduct was individual and some was collective.
According to the court, those who requested a reduction of liability failed to demonstrate the precautions they had taken to prevent their children's behavior.
There may be no further appeals.