The jury finds him guilty after he admitted the facts | The Prosecutor’s Office and the accusation request a sentence of 13 years in prison
Santos Caballero Fernández, a 53-year-old resident of Salceda, acknowledged yesterday Monday at the Hearing of Pontevedra who killed his brother Ángel on August 30, 2019, beating him on a farm owned by the victim using a hoe. This confession, and the will of the parties, made it possible to considerably reduce the number of days that were reserved for this trial, as the Prosecutor’s Office and the two attorneys for the prosecution and the defense resigned from a large part of the evidence.
The private accusation, which initially described the events as murder during the investigation, lowered its claims and adhered to the qualification made by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which asks for 13 years in prison for homicide. The test was shortenedtherefore, to the testimony of the defendant Santos Caballero, to that of the main witness of the events (the wife of the victim and sister-in-law of the aggressor) and to that of the two forensic experts who performed the autopsy of the deceased.
In this way, the parties cleared up the case before the popular jury in charge of handing down the verdict, eliminating numerous testimonies that were only going to contribute, in the words of the different parties, to highlighting in the court a “Family enmity latent for years & rdquor; that it was not going to be pleasant for anyone and that it would divert the attention of the members of the popular court from the central fact to prosecute. This speeded up the work of the jury, which deliberated for about five hours and soon returned a unanimous verdict: guilty of manslaughter. They consider that he acted with the “intention to end life & rdquor; of his brother or at least knowing that it was very likely to happen.
The prosecution showed the jury a sentence in which the defendant had already been convicted of hitting his brother with a chair, whom he killed three years later.
From the aggressor’s testimony it was clear that the relationship with his brother had not been good for a long time. He said that it wasn’t like that because of him and that he was trying to avoid Angel to avoid conflict situations. However, the lawyer representing the widow and her children stressed to the members of the jury the existence of a sentence prior to the events in which Santos had already been convicted of assaulting his brother Ángel with a chair in a public establishment in Salceda.
The defendant, in his interrogation, acknowledged that his brother Ángel was found that day in a farm owned by the latter in Entenza, in Salceda. He questioned him to reproach him for something about the broken rear-view mirror of his car and assures that he responded with insults. He maintained that the victim attempted to assault him and then he fell to the ground. “I don’t know if it fell or was thrown, for me it was thrown & rdquor ;, he indicated. He acknowledged that after she “grabbed a stick & rdquor ;, which turned out to be the victim’s hoe and then hit him several times on the head with it.. She also stated that, although she saw him bleed from the head, she said she did not know “where she hit it & rdquor; in a somewhat erratic testimony in this regard. He was also not very specific about the times he hit him, although he went on to say “two or three & rdquor ;. Later he acknowledged that, after realizing the seriousness of the events, he left the place losing his shoes and called the Civil Guard, making himself available to the authorities. He admits that he took a shower before, because he “knew that I was going to go to jail from there & rdquor ;. He also alleged that when he called the Civil Guard he does not know if he told them to come because “matei ao meu irmán & rdquor; or because he told them “mallei ao meu irmán & rdquor ;. The private prosecution also highlighted the testimony of the civil guard collected in the investigation that He assured that the man called him saying that they should come quickly, that he had just killed his brother “with a sacho & rdquor; .
Faced with this confession, which was not entirely illuminating in certain aspects but was in the basic details, the Prosecutor’s Office requested the appearance of the wife of the deceased, who was expected not to testify, but to whom the prosecutor in the case resorted to tie up in any case. your evidence arsenal. The widow’s testimony was harsh and forceful. After receiving a call from her husband telling her to go down to the farm, she assures that she clearly saw how the defendant, her brother-in-law, was in front of her husband with the hoe (which belonged to the victim). While the aggressor was standing, the victim was sitting motionless, as if “If I had already received a blow before & rdquor;, since he did not make any defensive gesture when Santos gave him “the three blows & rdquor; hoe to the head that she claims to have witnessed while she yelled at the accused “stop, stop, stop & rdquor ;, without him paying any attention to her. When she reached the height of both of them, she assures that Santos crossed paths with her and barely told her “there you have it, now bury it & rdquor; and that she left. The woman, between sobs, described the harsh scenario with which she found herself, with her husband with his head cut open and dying. He was transferred alive to the Álvaro Cunqueiro hospital but died shortly after. The accused denied saying a word to his sister-in-law.
The forensic confirmed that the body had multiple injuries, “at least several of them caused by three blows to the head”, which caused the death of Ángel and that they are “compatible & rdquor; with the use of a hoe.
The jury considers it unanimously proven that Santos Caballero Fernandezon August 30, 2019, he hit his brother Ángel with a “sacho” on the head at least three times and with “great force”, with “the intention of ending his life” or at least “assuming” that he could Finish with her.
The juries also unanimously agree oppose possible suspension of the execution of the sentence that is now imposed or a possible pardon.
As a result of this decision, the prosecutor asked the court to impose a sentence of 13 years in prison on the defendant for the murder of his brother, with the extenuating circumstance of confession (the jury also considered proven that the defendant notified the Civil Guard of the facts and collaborated with them) and the aggravating circumstance of kinship.
It also calls for establishing the Prohibition that the accused can approach less than 500 meters of the wife and children of the victim for a period of 23 years and to compensate them with 200,000 and 300,000 euros respectively. The private prosecution adhered to the request of the Prosecutor’s Office.