Lynching, riot, beating, fight, mob, aggression, attack, hunting. These are just some of the terms with which the witnesses who have testified so far in the trial for the crime of Samuel Luiz describe the six minutes of terror that ended the life of the nurse from A Coruña. Everyone seems to agree that what happened that early morning of July 3, 2021, the first nightlife opening during the pandemic, transcended all limits. Even Catherine Silva and Alejandro Míguez –two of the five accused–, who already gave statements before the nine members of the popular jury, even verbalized it this way. “It was animalistic”Katy, who faces 25 years in prison for an alleged vicious murder and aggravated by discrimination based on sexual orientation, summarized at the end of her interrogation. Míguez, for whom they ask for 22 years, was one of the few who saw Samuel fall “collapsed” to the ground. But he “disassociated himself” from the fatal beating. “I am innocent,” he said..
The memories that resonated in the first seven sessions of a trial that will last for a month in the Provincial Court of La Coruña draw a Dantesque scene, of unbridled violence, more typical of the Middle Ages —lamented the lawyer for the popular accusation—than from a European city in the 21st century. Its protagonists, the alleged perpetrators, day after day occupy a bench in which their respective lawyers function as a barrier between them. Those who once formed a compact group of friends run in opposite directions to save himself from prison. The same morning of the crime they met in a park, supposedly to plot a common alibi. But in a few hours that camaraderie was blown up.as confirmed by a chat on Instagram that one of the accused had with a friend the next day, and to which this newspaper had access.
That ‘every man for himself’ He has become sophisticated in the trial with the help of his lawyers, with a strategy in which, in addition to shaking off responsibility for the crime, they even target his colleagues on the bench. This dynamic, in which each defense goes its own way, presents a scenario in which more than one trial there are five simultaneous plenary sessions. Almost like in a game of multiple chess, in which the prosecutor and the lawyers of the accusations were jumping from table to table moving a piece against each of the defendants. A board on which the jury members must strive to individualize the role of each of them in the crime.
Another obstacle that further entangles the work of the popular court is the existence of a sentence, now final, against the two minors convicted for their participation in the lynching of Samuel Luiz. A process that was resolved on the sidelines and on the fast track with a sentence of three and a half years of confinement because Marco and David, alias ‘Pompo’, were minors at the time of the events. It was a conformity sentence, in which the two acknowledged their participation in the crime.but due to the very nature of the process, it is unknown in what terms and with what degree of involvement. One more difficulty for the court, with ‘five trials’ underway to be resolved and a final sentence hovering over the courtroom.
Minors do not ask for forgiveness
Marco and Pompo, who have just a few months left to pay off their internment sentence, appeared on Thursday as witnesses in the trial against the five who were of legal age at the time. But far from shedding light on the facts, They seem to have forgotten almost everything about that night, except what they had drunk.. Nor did they utter any words of repentance or forgiveness.
Another ‘handicap’ for the jury is the contradictions. The time that had passed since the night of the beating, the state in which some of the witnesses were, the poor visibility and the chaotic nature of the tumult caused several of those interrogated to incur notable contradictions. Some of them, for example, referring to the clothing that each accused was wearing that night and that will be key to locating them in the unclear images that are preserved from the moments of the attack.
The trial continues on Monday, with the testimony of more witnesses and also the victim’s father. For now, Katy and Alejandro Míguez, the two defendants who are on provisional release and who chose to testify at the beginning of the plenary session to try to distance themselves from the other three defendants, are the ones who seem to have the best chance of getting away. The most notable, although to different degrees, are the three individuals who are in preventive detention: Diego Montaña, Kaio Amaral and Llumba.
In this imaginary counter of points for and against that the plenary has become, there are those who after the first part of the meeting have it worse than at the beginning. Especially Diego Montaña, Katy’s then boyfriend, who at the trial only raises his head to comment on the session with his lawyer. It was he who started the attack when, upon leaving the Andén pub, on the Riazor promenade, He pounced on Samuel, believing that the young man, 24 years old and whom he did not know, was recording him with his phone, when in reality he was talking on a video call with a friend who had not gone out.
Several witnesses accuse him of hitting Samuel – including the two defendants who have already testified – and of uttering the insults for which the accusations introduce the aggravating circumstance of discrimination. Not only do they accuse him in unison of calling Samuel a “faggot,” but of threatening to kill him. “He yelled at him ‘I’m going to stab you in the heart, I have nothing to lose'”up to three witnesses to the events agreed this week. Three other people who crossed paths with him shortly after they left the dying Samuel revealed that he spoke of him as a “fucking faggot.”
Behind Diego in the hail of accusations is Llumba. Several witnesses accuse him of knocking Samuel down by the neck – with the technique known as ‘mataleón’ -. And some of them also accuse him of having gone “for” the victim: “When he fell to the ground, Llumba wanted to hit him again.”
Of the three who are in prison, Kaio Amaral is, for now, the least affected. In the aforementioned Instagram messages that Llumba wrote after the crime -and before anyone was arrested-, he pointed the finger directly at him for the attack: “It was Kaio, some kicks, very serious.” At the trial, one of the witnesses, who was a friend of the group, confirmed that they saw Kaio run towards the place where Samuel was being lynched and make the gesture of kicking him: «He carried his leg to kick him». However, this young man did not see if that kick hit the victim’s body. Kaio is the one who faces the longest prison sentence, 27 years in prison, since he is credited with the theft – with force – of Samuel’s cell phone.
In Katy’s case, the request is 25 years in prisonbecause the accusations attribute the same aggravating factor of discrimination to her as her then boyfriend. She is not accused of directly attacking Samuel but, supposedly, for trying to prevent a friend of the victim from helping him. Among the witnesses, there are different interpretations: some confirm that, indeed, she stopped her friend to facilitate the attack, and others Others think that she was trying to get her boyfriend to stop lynching Samuel Luiz.
Alejandro Míguez is the fifth defendant. As in Katy’s case, so far no witness has seen him hit the victim. Of course, according to what a young man revealed at the oral hearing, at that time Míguez told him something that could compromise him: that He had had “a struggle with a black man”in reference to the two young Senegalese people who tried to help Samuel.
This is a brief x-ray of the first two weeks of plenary. But in these ‘five simultaneous trials’ there are still many hands to play: more witnesses, police, forensics and three defendants who will testify at the end and who will finish distributing responsibilities.
#HUNT #SAMUEL #LUIZ #TRIAL
