A crime committed by an unknown person. Less than a week after being exonerated by a popular jury, the Alicante Court yesterday issued the acquittal of the hairdresser accused of beating a friend to death in the San Blas neighborhood. The ruling, which can be appealed to the Superior Court of Justice, ensures that there is insufficient evidence to convict and concludes that the crime was committed by “an unknown person” and “for unknown reasons.”
The 81-year-old victim was murdered in his home after receiving more than fifty blows to the head with a blunt object at some unknown time on September 6, 2014. The deceased’s nephews found the body the next morning, alarmed because it did not respond. to your calls.
The defendant, Antonio CM, was a neighborhood barber who had known him for years and who was at his home on the day of the crime. One of the circumstances that have determined the acquittal is the absence of conclusive data on the time at which the crime occurred. The ruling recalls that the defendant admits that he was in the house between 1:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. and that he was only between ten and fifteen minutes. The accusations clung to the fact that in that strip the victim spoke by phone with another neighbor, who also assured that she saw the accused leave the house at around 3:00 p.m. An extreme that the failure does not consider proven. This witness did not testify at trial after being cleared for illness and her testimony was not provided at trial, the ruling says.
The sentence values the fact that experts did not agree on the time of death, which could have occurred between 2 p.m. and midnight. “This uncertainty is influenced by the ambient temperature in the house, that is, if the air conditioning was on and the doors were open,” says the resolution. None of these points could be clarified during the trial by the witnesses. For the afternoon slot, the defendant had an alibi because he was with his family eating and then having dinner with some friends.
According to the resolution, the jury also assessed the injuries to the hands that the defendant had on the afternoon of September 7. In his opinion, they were not related to “the brutal aggression that was inflicted on the victim because the injuries should have been on the palms of the hands”. The people’s court has proven that these injuries occurred while the defendant was turning a portable beer tap in his bonfire shed on Sunday morning.
The sentence recalls the appearance of biological remains of an unknown person at the crime scene and mixed with the victim’s blood. Regarding the appearance of the deceased’s DNA on a defendant’s bracelet, the ruling recalls that the jury has ruled out that these remains could be blood and that they could have been caused while shaving or after a hug.
Eddie is an Australian news reporter with over 9 years in the industry and has published on Forbes and tech crunch.