The trial for the murder of Samuel Luiz on July 3, 2021 in A Coruña has ended with the arguments of the lawyers defending the five accused and the last word for them, which everyone has made use of. With different situations, the strategies have been separated for each of them, but they have agreed in trying to dismantle that the attack was comparable to a pack, as the prosecutor describes it, and in denying that the motivation was homophobia. The crime sparked a protest movement against the attacks on the LGTBI community, with demonstrations throughout Spain, because the last thing the victim heard before starting to receive blows was: “Stop recording me, let’s see if I’m going to kill you.” , faggot.”
In the last session, the lawyer of Diego MM, the accused who has acknowledged that he started the fatal beating, Luis Manuel Salgado, has questioned whether his client’s intervention was what caused Samuel’s death. He began to hit him, something he described as “unquestionable,” but he maintains that afterward he does not continue attacking him, Europa Press reports. “This is what we must analyze and why we must condemn Diego, but we cannot fall into the simplistic way of saying that, as Diego hits Samuel and dies from a succession of blows, he killed him and did so in a treacherous manner,” he explained to the jury. His client, he added, must pay, but only “for what he really did.” “Go to the tests,” he insisted.
He tried to dismantle that the motivation was homophobic: “The reason why he hits him is the confusion with the video call and the rest are tall tales.” And he tried to sow doubts about whether the intention was to kill: “If any of these kids who hit Samuel imagine that he was going to die, they will shit their pants and not even God will touch Samuel.” He also maintained that he had the possibility of defense and referred to the intervention of two Senegalese migrants who, however, could not completely stop the blows launched by the aggressors.
For Diego MM, the Prosecutor’s Office maintains the request for 25 years in prison for murder aggravated by discrimination based on sexual orientation. His defense requests homicide due to serious recklessness and the crime of injury, for which he requests two and one year, respectively, and, if not considered, homicide, with a sentence of ten years in prison. The accused used the right to speak at the end to once again ask for forgiveness from the family and express his regret: “If I could give my life to Samuel, I would give it to him without thinking.”
David Freire, the lawyer of Alejandro FG, known as Yumba, has also defended that the accused had no intention of killing Samuel. He has reduced his client’s intervention to grabbing him by the neck from behind for five seconds and to a “struggle.” “If my client intervenes at the initial point, it is not the same as someone who hits when he was no longer standing,” he stated. He appealed for the jury to make an “objective” analysis of the evidence and avoid relying on “emotions.” The Prosecutor’s Office requests 22 years in prison for this accused for murder, as in the rest of the cases, with cruelty and treachery. His defense asks that it be considered a crime of injuries or, if not, reckless homicide or manslaughter. In his last word, Alejndro FG apologized again.
For Kaio ASC, it is the accused for whom the highest sentence is requested: 27 years in prison because the murder is compounded by the violent robbery of the victim’s cell phone. One of the main elements against him is that a witness claimed to have seen him carrying his leg to kick and that the police who reviewed the images believe that he makes that gesture, although you cannot see how it ends because a streetlight covers it. His lawyer, Ramón Sierra, has also tried to argue that there is no conclusive evidence against his client: “Being there does not imply participation.” And he has criticized the Prosecutor’s Office’s interpretation that they acted like a pack: “They are not a pack, nor a pack, nor Jewish hunters. “That is demagoguery.”
The accused said in turn that his intention that night was to “have a good time” with his friends after working. “And it all ended very badly, but I didn’t touch Samuel at any time, I don’t care what anyone thinks.” And he addressed his mother, present at the trial, to tell her that he is not a murderer.
Regarding the theft of the mobile phone, the lawyer said he regretted that Kaio ASC admitted in court that he had sold stolen devices on other occasions. He may be, he said, “a chorizo and a fool,” but he maintained that his intervention was to try to stop the aggression. He asks for the acquittal of his client and only maintains a conviction for a crime against property over the telephone.
Defendants who are not in prison
Catherine SB’s lawyer, Luciano Prado, has focused on the fact that no testimony places her as either attacking or inciting her and that she could not do more to stop the brutal attack: “A girl weighing 50 kilos and 1.50 is going to be able to to stop all this!” “No one helped that boy and there were little men,” he added, arguing that, if it were a matter of judging her for not having helped, most of the witnesses who went through the trial should have sat on the stand. He has also attacked the comparison with a pack: “These things happen, but I have never seen a leader of the pack.”
On the other hand, they have announced that they will request that false testimony be opened against Samuel’s friend, Lina, who declared that Catherine SB also called Samuel a “fucking faggot.” The lawyer maintains that this is not true and wondered why “he didn’t say it until the day of the trial.” “I don’t know why we are bringing this trial with this folklore of homosexuality; “This has nothing to do with it,” he added. She used her turn to defend that she did “nothing wrong”: “I just tried to stop my boyfriend, I couldn’t do anything else.” For her, 25 years in prison are requested, although the Prosecutor’s Office introduced in its final position the possibility that, alternatively, she could be sentenced as an accomplice to murder to 14 and a half years. His lawyer asks for acquittal.
Regarding Alejandro MR’s defense, he has stated that there is “not a single piece of evidence” that his client participated in the fatal attack on Samuel Luiz. “You can see him not doing anything,” he insisted, and “running is not a crime, it is not an action that collaborates in Samuel’s bite, nor is it calling or being called.” “It is indecent that this guy is sitting here,” he said, because “not a single accused points him out, not a single witness.” “It is one thing to be a coward, to not have empathy, to have looked the other way. It is one thing to be there and do nothing and another thing is to participate in death,” he emphasized. Regarding the comparison with a pack, the lawyer, Manuel Ferreiro, maintains that “it is not a pack. “That pack from Pamplona planned what they were going to do on their cell phones.”
For him, the request for 22 years in prison is maintained, although, as in Catherine’s case, the possibility of a sentence as an accessory to murder to 13 years in prison is raised. His lawyer asks for acquittal. The accused addressed the jury in turn: “Gentlemen and ladies, I sincerely believe that you are not going to believe me. “I am deeply sorry for what happened to Samuel Luiz that tragic night of July 3 and what his family is experiencing, as well as those closest to him.” “I only ask that you do justice, that you be fair to me, I am totally innocent of this,” he said.
#defenses #accused #killing #Samuel #deny #existence #pack #persecuted #homophobic #reasons
