The Second Section of the Provincial Court of Albacete has held this Wednesday the second day of the trial with a popular jury against P.L.B., the man being prosecuted for the death of his partner --A.C.G.-- and, allegedly, for having caused a fire in the home to cover up the crime that occurred in Albacete in 2022. The session has been marked by the defendant’s refusal to testify and by the statements of the various witnesses called.
In this way, the accused has limited himself to rejecting the facts to the only question asked by the presiding magistrate, without submitting to questioning by the Prosecutor’s Office nor by the private and popular prosecutions. He also did not respond to questions raised by his own defense, waiving full testimony.
After that, the trial continued with the testimony of several witnesses. The first to take the stand was M.C.C., a neighbor of the victim, who, in response to questions from the Ministry of Public Prosecution, stated that shortly after 10:30 p.m. he saw the accused leave the building’s entrance and get into a car. A few minutes later, he observed that he returned carrying two suitcases and a bag of a large size.
By early morning, around 3.00 a.m. on December 10, M.C.C. has related that he woke up startled by the noise of the firefighters’ operation, who were acting to put out the fire declared at the victim’s home.
Next, P.C.G. testified, the sister of the deceased, who explained that she does not know for sure how long the sentimental relationship between her sister and the accused lasted, given that the victim "she was very reserved about everything," although she estimates that it was approximately "7 or 8 months." She recalled that on December 8 the victim told the family that she had ended the relationship. She also emphasized that her sister had no known enmities.
The sister added that, as far as what the victim herself told her, she knew that the accused was the father of two children whom he barely attended to, something that caused distress to her sister. She also related that on one occasion she warned the victim after learning of an incident of violence by the accused toward a relative of hers. "She told me, then also I told him, that he should be careful, that this man had a problem with his sister, he punched her, and he broke the teeth out of her mouth," she said in court.
Along the same lines, the victim’s mother, J.G.A., has stated that she did not know the exact length of time her daughter kept the relationship with the accused, although she did perceive, from what they were being told by her, that it was an intermittent relationship. She has detailed that, when she was with him, her daughter reduced social contact to the bare minimum and her usual relationships.
The progenitor has also pointed out that, during the work carried out after the fire, inside the home her daughter’s mobile phone appeared; it fell "from the ceiling" while cleaning tasks were being carried out, although the device was already out of use.
Witness L.A.P., a close friend of the victim, has also testified, who has stated that the accused and the deceased lived together in the home where the events occurred. In addition, she has recalled an incident in which the victim told her that the accused had assaulted her at the doors of an establishment.
This witness has indicated that the victim showed strong emotional dependence on the accused. She has added that, over time, she was losing social ties, although she specified that she does not know whether it was "by her own decision" or due to the influence the accused might have had on her.
The last testimony from the close circle has been that of M.A.R., the victim’s ex-husband, who has limited himself to explaining that he divorced her in 2014 and that, since then, contact had become less and less. He has pointed out that he knew that A.C.G. was maintaining a new romantic relationship, but he did not know who her new partner was.
The first agents found indications of a crime
Subsequently, several National Police officers who went to the scene after the fire alert have testified, including the first two police officers who entered the apartment and located the victim in the living room. These officers have placed the events around 3:30 a.m. on the Saturday, December 10.
Among the police testimonies, that of the investigation’s lead investigator stood out, who has clarified that the first steps taken at the scene by Scientific Police made it possible to determine that "it is a deliberately set fire". In this regard, he has explained that "the Scientific Police colleagues, in a cupboard, in the living room a few meters or distance from the sofa, intervene in an empty and crushed bottle of alcohol".
At first, the investigators considered the possibility that the fire had been "the motive for death". However, after the autopsy, the forensic doctor told them that "death is of a violent nature and homicidal in character because it presents various craniocephalic traumas, as well as that I want to remember that there was no black soot in the larynx, that is, that he was dead before the fire".
Based on this information, the officers of the National Police activated the investigation protocols, conducting multiple interviews with neighbors and relatives of the victim, as well as "gathering images from the surrounding area" from different security cameras. Those recordings made it possible to track the movements recorded in the area, also relying on the identification of the victim's vehicle, described as "quite distinctive".
The instructor has presented before the court a chronological sequence of the recordings in which the movement of the car attributed to the victim is seen, as well as the figure of the person driving it. As he has detailed, it can be observed "a physiognomy" and "one of the garments that are recovered at the home and that he himself states that he was wearing on Friday", which he has qualified as "compatible" with the accused.
Trial calendar and requests for sentence
According to the initial forecast, the trial, which began on Tuesday, November 3, will continue until next December 13. After the phase of witness testimony concludes, the next sessions will focus on the intervention of the officers responsible for the investigation and the forensic experts in charge of the technical reports.
Once the taking of evidence practice is completed, the lay jury, made up of 7 women and 2 men, must deliberate and issue a verdict on the accused's guilt or innocence regarding the offenses attributed to him.
The Public Prosecutor's Office requests a total of 40 years in prison for P.L.B.: 25 years for an offense of murder with premeditation and 15 more years for the offense of arson. The private prosecution, which represents the victim's mother and sister, raises the request to 45 years of imprisonment, by seeking 20 years of conviction for the arson.
For its part, the defense of the accused maintains that he is innocent. It states that on the night of the events there was an argument between the couple, but it insists that its client was not the author of the victim’s death nor the person responsible for starting the fire in the residence.