La corroboración periférica: diálogo jurisprudencial entre el Tribunal Supremo de España y la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Colombia (2020-2025)
Cargando...
Fecha
2026
Autores
Sandoval Calderon, Samuel David
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Ediciones Universidad Simón Bolívar
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Resumen
Esta investigación profundiza en la metamorfosis del razonamiento probatorio respecto a los delitos de libertad e indemnidad sexual, un escenario donde la clandestinidad sitúa al testimonio de la víctima como pieza central para reconstruir la verdad procesal. El estudio analiza el tránsito desde la "íntima convicción" hacia un estándar de “fiabilidad objetiva”, tomando como eje la corroboración periférica en las jurisdicciones de España y Colombia entre 2020 y 2025.
Se toma como hito la sentencia del caso Dani Alves (TSJ 109/2025), la cual establece una distinción técnica entre credibilidad subjetiva y fiabilidad objetiva.
Este fallo demuestra que la persistencia del relato resulta insuficiente si datos externos e inalterables (como grabaciones de CCTV, hallazgos de ADN o vestigios
lofoscópicos) contradicen partes nucleares de la narrativa, obligando a un escrutinio de veracidad intersubjetivamente contrastable.
Mediante un diálogo jurisprudencial comparado, se identifica la consolidación del "triple test" (ausencia de incredibilidad subjetiva, verosimilitud y persistencia) para
enervar la presunción de inocencia. Providencias como el Radicado 53097 en Colombia destacan que el daño psíquico y los indicadores conductuales funcionan
como anclajes de verosimilitud. Mientras España aporta una arquitectura técnica de control rigurosa, Colombia integra la perspectiva de género para erradicar
estereotipos discriminatorios. En conclusión, la corroboración periférica actúa como un filtro de racionalidad indispensable que permite alcanzar una probabilidad lógica
suficiente para condenar, garantizando que el estándar de prueba proteja los derechos fundamentales en el proceso penal.
This research delves into the metamorphosis of evidentiary reasoning regarding crimes of sexual freedom and indemnity, a scenario where intrinsic clandestinity places the victim's testimony as the central piece to reconstruct the procedural truth. The study analyzes the transition from "intimate conviction" toward a standard of objective reliability, taking as its axis peripheral corroboration in the jurisdictions of Spain and Colombia between 2020 and 2025. The ruling of the Dani Alves case (TSJ 109/2025) is taken as a milestone, which establishes a technical distinction between subjective credibility and objective reliability. This judgment demonstrates that the persistence of the narrative is insufficient if external and unalterable data —such as CCTV recordings, DNA findings, or lofoscopic traces— contradict core parts of the narrative, forcing a scrutiny of intersubjectively contrastable veracity. Through a comparative jurisprudential dialogue, the consolidation of the "triple test" (absence of subjective incredibility, plausibility, and persistence) is identified to rebut the presumption of innocence. Decisions such as Radicado 53097 in Colombia highlight that psychic damage and behavioral indicators function as anchors of plausibility. While Spain provides a rigorous technical architecture of control, Colombia integrates the gender perspective to eradicate discriminatory stereotypes. In conclusion, peripheral corroboration acts as an indispensable rationality filter that allows for reaching a sufficient logical probability to convict, guaranteeing that the standard of proof protects fundamental rights in the contemporary criminal process.
This research delves into the metamorphosis of evidentiary reasoning regarding crimes of sexual freedom and indemnity, a scenario where intrinsic clandestinity places the victim's testimony as the central piece to reconstruct the procedural truth. The study analyzes the transition from "intimate conviction" toward a standard of objective reliability, taking as its axis peripheral corroboration in the jurisdictions of Spain and Colombia between 2020 and 2025. The ruling of the Dani Alves case (TSJ 109/2025) is taken as a milestone, which establishes a technical distinction between subjective credibility and objective reliability. This judgment demonstrates that the persistence of the narrative is insufficient if external and unalterable data —such as CCTV recordings, DNA findings, or lofoscopic traces— contradict core parts of the narrative, forcing a scrutiny of intersubjectively contrastable veracity. Through a comparative jurisprudential dialogue, the consolidation of the "triple test" (absence of subjective incredibility, plausibility, and persistence) is identified to rebut the presumption of innocence. Decisions such as Radicado 53097 in Colombia highlight that psychic damage and behavioral indicators function as anchors of plausibility. While Spain provides a rigorous technical architecture of control, Colombia integrates the gender perspective to eradicate discriminatory stereotypes. In conclusion, peripheral corroboration acts as an indispensable rationality filter that allows for reaching a sufficient logical probability to convict, guaranteeing that the standard of proof protects fundamental rights in the contemporary criminal process.
Descripción
Tabla de contenidos
Palabras clave
Corroboración periférica, Credibilidad subjetiva, Fiabilidad objetiva, Presunción de inocencia, Indicio
