Supreme Court Decision of 10 March 2011.
SECOND .- - As to the presumption of innocence must remember that it is a presumption that only deals with facts as facts can be tested, even to the extent that the activity of proof required art. 24.2 has to be linked to the crime subject to a sentence, it is necessary that the evidence against him relates to the underlying facts of all the objective elements of crime and subjective elements such as are determinants of guilt, but are outside circumstances such a presumption concerning the legal status and the possible existence of mitigating circumstances to criminal responsibility, which must be accredited as the typical fact-dependent (SSTS. 29.11.1999, 23.4.2001, 28.2.2007), but may be presumed to exist, while the accusations do not prove otherwise.
can not understand being so produced no infringement of the right to presumption of innocence. The defendant's version of lack of awareness in the bag briefcases for nearly two kilos of cocaine, is inconsistent with the rules of logic and lessons of experience.
More » 
0 comments:
Post a Comment