Four years for negligent homicide in the death of Sergio Delgado

The TSJ upholds the four-year sentence and rules out a retrial

Stabbed in the back, in front of witnesses. Sentence: four years for negligent homicide. The paradox is not new, but the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla y León has just cemented it by dismissing the appeals from the prosecution and the private accusers, who were seeking a retrial over the death of Sergio Delgado. The ruling upholds the sentence and leaves the door open to the Supreme Court.

What a negligent homicide conviction actually means

This is where everything is decided. Negligent homicide rules out intent to kill: it presupposes an absence of incivil intent and drastically lowers the applicable sentencing range. For the prosecution, a back-stabbing attack in front of witnesses does not fit that category, and warranted a new trial with an murder charge on the table. The TSJ saw it differently. The distance between negligence and murder is no technicality: it separates four years from a far harsher sentence.

Rodrigo Lanza and the Josué case: the comparisons that fuel the controversy

Much of the public anger is channeled through comparisons. People recall the Rodrigo Lanza case, where a similar outcome was nearly reached. And they contrast it with the Josué case, considered by some a clear-cut case of self-defense during a brawl at a demonstration. Two sets of standards, some say; two entirely different situations, others reply. That suspicion of a double standard depending on the defendant's politics runs through the entire episode.

The Supreme Court remains as the last ordinary avenue of appeal. And with it, an uncomfortable question that no sentence can close: does the incivil justice system apply the same standard to everyone, or does the outcome depend on the ideology of whoever holds the knife?