The Public Prosecutor’s Office asks for the conviction of Javier Criado [reportedly a member of the Spanish Society of Psychiatry] for the “psychological harassment and bullying” of a patient.
A patient of the psychiatrist Javier Criado, in the trial for alleged malpractice: “He only asked for sex, sex and sex“. The oral hearing begun in Seville for a continued offence against the moral integrity of the doctor, denounced by 27 women for abuse
The lawyer for the prosecution, Inmaculada Torres, cites in her report the conviction of Al Capone for tax evasion and says that in the case of Criado after the denunciation of many women atleast “he has been prosecuted for a crime against moral integrity”.
The Seville Public Prosecutor’s Office has requested a two-year prison sentence for the psychiatrist Javier Criado for the “psychological harassment and bullying” he inflicted on a patient who came to his surgery and whom he treated in a “foul and humiliating” manner, for which he has also requested that he be prohibited from approaching the victim within 300 metres and the payment of compensation of 6,000 euros.
According to El Pais a patient of psych Criado, said the shrink
“The doctor [psych] called me crazy and told me that I had to fuck more, that I should wear high heels and a red thong. And I was getting worse and worse as I walked out of the door in a wreck.”
A Spanmish victim
Original article by Jorge Muñoz (in Spanish)
The prosecutor in the case, Carmen Escudero, on Friday raised her provisional conclusions to final in the trial against the well-known psychiatrist from Seville, which has been scheduled for sentencing, and in which she has demanded a conviction for a crime against moral integrity. Dr Javier Criado, said the representative of the public prosecution, was a “professional psychiatrist with many years of experience, who was presented with a person with extreme vulnerability and subjected her to psychological harassment and bullying that generated a feeling of humiliation that persists to this day” in the patient, she asserted.
Likewise, the representative of the Public Prosecutor’s Office detailed the “foul and vulgar” expressions with which the psychiatrist addressed the victim, whose testimony she considers “essential” and which meets all the requirements to be considered as “real evidence for the prosecution”, in addition to the fact that it is “credible, coherent and persistent”, her version has been “always the same”.
The prosecutor also referred to the other complaints and denunciations presented by many other women to the medical association of Seville, denouncing the “professional malpractice” of Dr Criado and how he “sexualised the consultations in an abusive way, referring everything to sexual matters and using language that was foul and inappropriate” for a medical professional. “I give credibility to the testimony of all the witnesses, but it is another thing if the facts were criminally prescribed,” said the prosecutor.
He also referred to the dismissal of the first complaint, that of a woman who testified in this trial that she had been sexually abused by the accused, in which the prosecution requested the dismissal, and regardless of this circumstance, he said that the “sensitivity” on these issues has changed nowadays with respect to 2007, so perhaps he pointed out that perhaps more tests could have been carried out than those that were done at that time.
The lawyer Inmaculada Torres, who is prosecuting on behalf of the complainant, has requested a sentence of 14 and a half years in prison for the psychiatrist, whom she accuses of a continuous crime against moral integrity and four crimes of injury, in which she also appreciates the aggravating circumstances of abuse of superiority, committing the crime for reasons of gender and the commission of the crime due to illness or disability.
The prosecution has ruled out that there is a “spirit of revenge” of the victim towards the accused because, as indicated in its report, there have been up to 27 women who have denounced “similar and much more serious events” than those being tried, in relation to the allegations of sexual abuse by the doctor, He added that all these women “did not know each other at all” and yet they reported similar events that took place in the psychiatrist’s surgery, so in his opinion “it is neither plausible nor credible” that Javier Criado alleges that he has been denounced for revenge.
Inmaculada Torres concluded her report with a reference to the conviction for the tax crime of the gangster Al Capone, and although she pointed out that Dr. Criado is not Al Capone, who had “a terrible gangster’s CV and in the end was arrested for tax evasion”, in the case of the psychiatrist, she recalled that many women have denounced acts committed in his surgery “since 1980 and unfortunately they have been declared time-barred”, He recalled that there are many women who have denounced acts committed in his surgery “since 1980 and unfortunately they have been declared time-barred”, for which he was pleased that at least “he has been prosecuted for a crime against moral integrity and we hope he will be sentenced”.
For his part, the lawyer Enrique del Río, who is defending the psychiatrist, has requested his acquittal and has denounced in his report the “tremendous campaign” that in his opinion has been deployed around this case, recalling that this trial only deals with the complaint of one of the victims for the alleged humiliation and degrading treatment of the accused, for which he has rejected “that they want to convict based on the testimony of 27 people” whose testimonies are not being judged in this process.
Thus, he stated that the first complaint was filed in 2005 because it was “incoherent”, and on the specific case of this trial he insisted on the complainant’s desire for revenge, who, according to the defence, acted because Criado refused to write a report saying that her husband inflicted alleged abuse on her, which, on the other hand, has never been reported either to the police or to the courts.
The lawyer pointed out that the complainant suffers from a histrionic personality disorder and “could not stand” the questions or comments that the doctor made to her about her support for Real Betis or the Cerro del Águila brotherhood – something that the accused denied in his statement on Wednesday – if they were true, and this generated an “animosity against the doctor and she began to create a story”, which she expanded with the alleged “orgy in the Sevilla box” or with questions about whether her husband “ate her pussy or not”.
The lawyer denied that there is a crime against moral integrity, asking whether there is degrading treatment in this case, “apart from foul or improper expressions, many of them jocular, and which may be in bad taste”, but which do not “objectify” the complainant. “Asking or saying that Betis is very bad or if you fuck your husband, we can call it whatever we want, but it is not degrading treatment”, he concluded.
The experts confirm the “coherence” and “credibility” of the complainant’s account.
In Friday’s session, the four experts who examined the complaint of M.G.G.P. also appeared, who agreed on the “coherence” and “credibility” of the complainant’s account, although one of them stated that the victim suffers from a histrionic personality disorder, while the other three experts denied the existence of such a disorder or traits of the same in the woman.
A forensic doctor from the Institute of Legal Medicine (IML) in Seville explained that he held two interviews with the woman, in which he noted a history of histrionic personality disorder and generalised anxiety disorder, although he pointed out that the woman’s account was “perfectly coherent”, because this type of patient, unlike psychotic patients, “do not have a loss of truth”, They are able to distinguish “perfectly well between what is real and what is not real, another thing is the interpretation she makes, but she is not going to say that she has seen a donkey flying”, exemplified the expert, who nevertheless agreed that the woman told all the foul comments that Dr Criado had said to her and that on one occasion he had advised her to wear a red thong to attract her husband’s attention.
In his report, the forensic expert ruled out “psychological damage” to the complainant on the four occasions that she was in Criado’s surgery, because he did not see “traumatic psychological damage” derived from these consultations and from which, in his opinion, if she had suffered it, it would have taken her a very long time to recover, and added that he did not believe that she left the surgery “deeply traumatised”. The expert did say that he was “very struck” by the way the complainant was dressed when he interviewed her, because “it is not normal when you go to court” and the woman “looked like she was going to a party”, while pointing out that histrionic patients – what used to be known as hysteria – have a tendency towards “theatricality, exaggeration of emotions and are influenced by others”, while they always “seek to be the centre of attention and are concerned about their physical appearance”.
Contrary to the opinion of the forensic expert, two psychologists and a social worker who also appeared as expert witnesses agreed that the victim suffered a “worsening or aggravation of her situation” after visiting Criado.
Thus, a psychologist from the court support service has indicated that she did not observe histrionic traits in the woman, who was in a situation of “extreme vulnerability” due to her mental state, nor that she incurred in “contradictions” or that her story was not coherent, so she concluded in her report that her testimony was “credible”. This expert indicated that, according to the complainant, Criado “simplified all her problems, saying that it was her fault, and focused on sex”, urging her to have sex with her husband. For this expert witness, the woman told “what she really felt, the suffering and emotional reactions left no doubt that they were genuine”.
The testimony of 11 other women
Another psychologist and a social worker have also concluded that her testimony “was truthful, there were no elements that would lead one to suspect” that her statements were “false or that she was fantasising”, and they also had the opportunity to obtain the testimony of 11 other women who passed through Criado’s office and were able to verify that the events they narrated “were very similar” and spoke of the foul comments and inappropriate language and that some even reported that they had been subjected to “touching”.
For these two experts, there was no histrionic disorder in the case of M.G.G.P., but rather an anxious-depressive symptomatology that worsened after her visit to the clinic, and they added that her passion for Betis and the fact that she went to watch the matches at the stadium was very important because it was “a safe place for her”, the “grip” she had to try to get out of her situation.
These two experts also pointed out that, unlike the forensic expert, they carried out “psychometric” tests that allowed them to rule out histrionic personality disorder in this patient.
