The Supreme Court (TS) has confirmed the sentence of 18 years and 4 months in prison imposed on a man who stabbed his friend - and neighbor - to death after finding him in bed with his ex-wife. The magistrates have refused to apply the mitigating circumstances of passionate outburst and confession, considering that his actions included "a long and meticulously prepared plan" and that his statement was not "relevant" to the investigation, but rather took place after the Police discovered the corpse and "all the material instruments used in the commission of the crime."
The sentence states that the events took place in Vila-Seca (Tarragona) in August 2020, that the accused and the woman had separated because their relationship had "deteriorated", that they had both been friends of the victim "for many years." years ago" and that she had started dating him "months before" separating without the knowledge of third parties.
According to the section of proven facts, the afternoon before the dawn of the murder, the accused went to his ex-father-in-law's chalet - where his ex-wife was with her lover - and remained for a few minutes in the area, where he saw the Porch. Your friend's Panamera. From there he went to a shopping center where he bought "two fishing knives" and a box of thirty latex gloves. And he returned to the area near the chalet, where he stayed for a few hours.
In the early morning, "after abandoning the flip-flops he was wearing on his feet on the public road, carrying with him two fishing knives, latex gloves and a scarp, he entered the garden area of the chalet, after having previously jumped over the fences that separated the homes on the same street." He entered the house, "which was unlocked," and, once inside, he went up the stairs and entered one of the bedrooms, where his ex-wife and his friend were sleeping naked in a double bed. There he stabbed his former neighbor.
The man "managed to get out of bed while receiving more stab wounds from the defendant." He eventually collapsed next to the bedroom window wall, where he died minutes later.
According to the sentence, "at that moment, she woke up" and the accused reproached her for her behavior "towards the common children" they have. Additionally, she told him not to say anything to the authorities. When the Local Police arrived at the scene, the woman attended them at the entrance and told them that nothing was happening, "although she simultaneously gestured to them in the direction of the first floor of the house."
The accused went down to the entrance of the chalet "with a naked torso after having previously removed his shirt and latex gloves." Although he limited himself to telling the officers that they had had a family argument, the police chose to go up to the first floor, where they found the victim's body.
Upon discovery, the accused asked: "How many years are I going to get?" He claimed that he "had stabbed" his friend and that the knives were his. The agents arrested him that same morning.
The Provincial Court of Tarragona sentenced him to 18 years and 4 months in prison for the crime of murder with malice aforethought and the crime of housebreaking. Dissatisfied with the sentence, the man took his case before the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia - which ratified the sentence - and finally before the Supreme Court.
In his appeal, he criticized the fact that the mitigating circumstance for passionate outburst or confession had not been applied. He alleged that his actions derived from a "mind clouded by passion," that he acted in "a situation of outburst and that he was not aware of what happened until some time later."
He also stressed that his "passionate reaction" was enhanced because "for gypsy culture, fidelity is key and there are customs that sanction its transgression." "All this, he says, makes it understandable, although not justifiable, that a reaction occurred that would not have occurred in another sociocultural environment," he defended.
In 22 pages, the Criminal Court has rejected their arguments. The magistrates have stressed that his "criminal action" was not an outburst but included "a long and meticulously prepared plan." In this sense, they have stressed that he gave him time to go to different establishments to buy material to carry out the attack.
In the resolution, for which Judge Pablo Llarena was the rapporteur, the Supreme Court concluded that the accused "did not suffer any intellectual restriction on his ability to understand the illegality of his action." Furthermore, he has insisted that "the historical account of the sentence does not include the description of any confession relevant to the investigation." And that his statement acknowledging responsibility took place after the Police discovered the body and "all the material instruments used in the commission of the crime."
Likewise, the court recalled that at first the accused defended before the jury of the Tarragona Court that "he had gone to the house to speak with (his ex-wife), unexpectedly finding her and (the victim) having relations." in the bedroom; alleging that, when he reproached (his friend) for his behavior, he attacked him violently and the accused had to use one of the knives he had with him to defend himself."
