Hate crime

The Supreme Court (TS) has confirmed a conviction for hate crime in a case where a man insulted and humiliated another person with clearly racist and discriminatory expressions , in addition to threatening her. The key idea of the ruling is that, for this type of behavior to be punished as a hate crime, there must be a real discriminatory motivation , meaning that the attack is not "just a fit of anger" or any random insult, but an attack directed against someone for belonging to a protected group (for example, based on their race or immigrant status).

The events took place when the accused argued in a bar over one euro that he thought he hadn't received back correctly from a vending machine. From there, he directed insults like " shitty black " at the owner of the establishment, and escalated to threatening of death, even in front of police officers. In addition, he was carrying an object that simulated a weapon and made intimidating gestures, which led to his arrest and the victim's complaint.

The Valencia Provincial Court sentenced him for crime against fundamental rights (hate crime), and the Supreme Court confirms that sentence (and also another one for minor threats). The Supreme Court argues, among other things, that here the attack was not only against a specific person, but against what he represented , despising her and trying to exclude her for being "non-Spanish" and for her skin color . The Supreme Court emphasizes that in a democratic State verbal assaults have no place of this type based on exclusion and hatred of the "different".