Criminal Lawyers for Simulated Crime (False Report)
Defense against charges of fabricating a crime or filing a false police report.
Last updated:
Simulated crime (simulación de delito, Article 457 Criminal Code) punishes anyone who falsely reports the commission of a crime they know did not occur, or who fabricates evidence to create the appearance that a crime was committed. It wastes judicial resources and can cause serious harm to falsely accused persons. The penalty is a fine of 6 to 12 months.
Common Scenarios
Typical cases include: filing false burglary reports for insurance fraud; fabricating assault or robbery to cover up personal losses; inventing vehicle theft to explain damage or to claim insurance; and filing false reports to create an alibi or to deflect suspicion from another crime. The crime is committed when the false report is filed, regardless of whether an investigation is actually initiated.
Defense Strategies
Our defense focuses on: demonstrating the report was made in good faith (the client genuinely believed a crime occurred even if it hadn't); proving the reported events actually happened (the accusation of simulation is itself false); arguing that exaggerations or inaccuracies in the report do not constitute simulation (embellishing a real incident differs from inventing one); and establishing that the report contained no specific false crime (vague complaints without identifying a concrete offense are not punishable).
Penalty Chart
| Type / Scenario | Criminal Penalty |
|---|---|
| Principal Penalty (Art. 457 CP) | Penalty established by the Criminal Code for this offence type. |
| Fines and Ancillary Penalties | Fines and special disqualification linked to Simulated Crime. |
| Civil Liability | Compensation to victims for damages and losses caused. |
* Penalties shown are indicative. The actual penalty depends on case circumstances, applicable mitigating and aggravating factors.
Defense Guide: Obstruction of Justice (Arts. 463-467 CC)
Penalty Table
| Type | Penalty | Article |
|---|---|---|
| Violence or intimidation against parties, lawyers, witnesses, experts or interpreters | Prison 1 to 4 years + fine 6-24 months | Art. 464.1 CP |
| Reprisals against witnesses, experts for their actions | Prison 1 to 4 years + fine 6-24 months | Art. 464.2 CP |
| Destruction or concealment of documents or evidence | Prison 6 months to 3 years | Art. 465 CP |
| Lawyer or attorney revealing client secrets | Fine 12-24 months + special disqualification 1-4 years | Art. 466 CP |
| Professional disloyalty: lawyer harming client through action or omission | Fine 6-24 months + special disqualification 2-4 years | Art. 467 CP |
Obstruction of justice (Arts. 463-467 CC) protects the proper functioning of the Administration of Justice against acts of intimidation, evidence destruction and professional disloyalty.
Key Defense Strategies
Absence of Specific Intent
Art. 464 requires direct intent to prevent or obstruct judicial action. Legitimate communications, rights advisories, or case discussions do not constitute intimidation.
Prior to Proceedings
Document destruction carried out before the start or knowledge of legal proceedings does not constitute obstruction (Art. 465). The date of destruction is determinative.
Legitimate Exercise of Defense
Advising a client on their rights, preparing their defense, or contacting the opposing party through legal channels can never be classified as obstruction.
Communication Context
Messages that appear threatening in isolation may be benign in context. Comprehensive forensic analysis of communications is key to dismantling intimidation charges.
Relevant Case Law
Doctrina del TS (Sala 2ª)
Mere silence or refusal to cooperate does not constitute obstruction of justice. Citizens have no general duty to assist police investigations absent an express court order.
Doctrina del TS (Sala 2ª)
Routine document destruction in the normal course of business operations before an investigation begins does not constitute obstruction under Art. 465 CP, even if those documents later become relevant.
Doctrina del TS (Sala 2ª)
Informing someone of their legal rights, including the right to remain silent, cannot constitute obstruction of justice or witness intimidation under Art. 464 CP.
Doctrina del TS (Sala 2ª)
Art. 464 CP intimidation requires threats that are serious, suitable, and immediate enough to restrict the freedom of action of a witness or expert. Mere expressions of displeasure or criticism do not reach the criminal threshold.
Why Choose Us?
Need a criminal defense lawyer for this type of offense? Here's how we work:
Do you need specialised legal assistance?
The judicial system is complex. We have the criminal-law specialisation and technical resources required to take on the defence.