Madrid, Apr 26 (EFE) .- The Supreme Court has confirmed the conviction of a man for helping and allowing his eight-year-old son to drive a vehicle alone while recording him from outside.
The Criminal Chamber has issued a judgment in which it dismisses the appeal of the father against the resolution of the Criminal Court number 1 of Gijón that sentenced him to 2,160 euros of fine for a crime against road safety and that was ratified also by the Audiencia of Asturias.
The sentence, issued by the Plenary of the Chamber and with a presentation by the magistrate Vicente Magro, unifies doctrine since there was a division between the Provincial Courts, some ruled out criminal responsibility in these cases of cooperation with the commission of the crime, such as those of Navarra or Toledo, compared to those who claimed that he did attend, such as those in Madrid, Valencia, Cantabria or A Coruña.
But the Supreme Court opts, when the collaboration of the third party is active and participatory so that the minor leads, and not a mere carelessness, in which there is a crime, as here in which “it is more of a mediate authorship than of a cooperation necessary “.
The sentence highlights that “the criminal responsibility of the father is absolute, inasmuch as it is not just that he has neglected the vigilance of the minor so that he does not use the vehicle, but that he has helped him to do so.”
The Supreme Court says that “the father has contributed with his decisive action to the typical conduct of the minor, with which his action cannot be exempt from criminal responsibility, remaining a mere administrative offense. This is not admissible.”
In addition, the father’s conduct supposes a direct assumption of possible civil liabilities that would have arisen in the event of possible damages to third parties, for which he would have to answer to the insurance company that had to cover them, precisely because his conduct was decisive in the case. of damages or injuries.
“Because it was not an individual isolated behavior of the minor, but a driving in which the father’s contribution had an active and decisive participation so that the minor’s driving of the motor vehicle without permission was possible,” he adds.
For the Supreme Court “it is evident that it is he who takes him to the place where the minor gets in front of the wheel, and it is he who records him, demonstrating an absolutely collaborative behavior in the commission of the criminal offense.”
(c) EFE Agency