Crime of the Chamber: Where is the guilty verdict record?

• Exclusive: This was the tense return to the jury of the guilty verdict
• First verdict: from guilty to not guilty in 43 hours
• The sentence "A stranger shot Mari Carmen Martínez"

The first verdict that declared Miguel López guilty of the murder of his mother-in-law, the widow of former CAM president Vicente Sala, is not there. The decision of the non-professional court, advanced by EL MUNDO, was not linked to the proceedings . Thus at least he has been transferred to the accusations after requesting them. An "not recorded" has been the answer.

The jury's first decision came on Friday, the 7th, one day after he retired to deliberate, but it was returned when the magistrate appreciated the motivational errors. On Sunday, 43 hours later, the non-professional court issued a second verdict in another sense and declared Lopez not guilty. The jury concluded, as reflected in the sentence issued last Monday, that "it was a stranger" who shot Mari Carmen Martínez the late night of December 9, 2016 in the laundry room of the family car dealership.

Both the Prosecutor's Office and the private prosecution exercised by the victim's son, Vicente Sala, and represented by lawyer Francisco Ruiz-Marco requested the minutes of the first deliberation . In that act, they understand, the arguments given by the six women and three men that made up the jury court, the motivation and the vote had to be recorded. However, "it does not appear" , as the Justice Administration (LAG) lawyer has sent them.

The Prosecutor's Office is now considering how to deal with an extreme that is being very controversial . The hearing convened by Judge Francisca Bru once the jury communicated her verdict on Friday 7 at night was very tense, as this newspaper reported in its edition last Sunday.

Both prosecutor José Llor and Ruiz-Marco did not share the magistrate's arguments to return the verdict. Bru asked the popular court to justify why he had not considered the contraindications , to explain why he considered unproven facts.

The representative of the Public Ministry and the lawyer of Vicente Sala understood that this was not necessary. The two ways of interpreting the law resulted in an uncomfortable exchange of ideas in the Chamber.

-Magistrada : And jurors have to explain if they exist, uh, I can't say more. This act is mine. They have to explain certain tests that have been practiced here, say Scientific Police or experts who have omitted any pronouncement that is evidence of discharge and must explain

-Francisco Ruiz Marco : But the jurors don't have to pronounce on the evidence, your honor. Jurors do not have to explain why they believe that a fact is not proven.

-M: Excuse me, I'm not going to get into an argument with you.

At that time the prosecutor intervenes.

-José Llor : My protest is.

-FRM : Sure, the protest is recorded.

-J.LL : Because, excuse me, I don't see that there is any cause in article 63 of the return to the jury made by the magistrate.

-FRM : No way

- M : Well, since it's me who determines ...

-FRM: Well, honor that the protest is already because this is actually a continuation of the instructions given to the jury, eh, your honor where they were introduced ...

-M: I am explaining the content of article 64 and explaining to jurors why I return the minutes.

-J.LL : Yes but excuse me, can you tell me what part of article 63 is considered infringed?

-M : Article 63 relates to 61 and all jurisprudence determines that there must be a succinct explanation of the reasons why they have declared or ruled out to declare certain facts as proven.

-FRM : As proven honor. As tested yes but not as not tested.

-M : We're done, please.

-J.LL : Excuse me, the jury does not have to pronounce on a thing that does not consider proven.

-FRM : About something you don't consider proven, you don't have to say anything at all.

-M : (Addressing the jury). Pay attention to me because I am the one who has to write a sentence in which no vice of nullity is incurred.

-J.LL: Well, record my protest.

-FRM : Let my protest be recorded.

-M : It has already been recorded.

- FRM : This is amazing, this is amazing.

- The jury spokeswoman intervenes : Why do we have to cite the condemnatory discharge tests?

-Other juror : We have not understood what that is

-M: For example, a paraffin test was performed and you will have to justify why ....

-FRM : Your Honor ...

-M : Keep quiet please. I understand that they have to justify why they don't give it any value.

- FRM : Your Honor

-M: Please keep quiet. I rely on the Supreme Court ruling that the indications and contraindications have to be assessed.

After this rifirrafe and after EL MUNDO published that Friday's verdict was guilty, the accusations requested the minutes of the jury's first decision; an act that "does not appear", as they have been informed of your request.

Apart from this, now both the Prosecutor's Office and the lawyer Ruiz-Marco are considering the possibility of presenting an appeal against the sentence of no guilt drafted by the magistrate based on the decision of the popular court before the Valencian Superior Court of Justice (TSJCV ).

At the moment, there is no decision taken because they have to analyze the fault carefully . In addition, an appeal may also be filed before the Supreme Court of the high regional court. However, it is still too early to consider going to both instances. The decision of both parties will determine the judicial future of the matter, if any.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

• Supreme Court
• Alicante
• Valencia
• Valencian Community
• Events

Sala Case Judgment of the Sala crime: "A stranger shot the widow of the former president of the CAM"

'Crime of the Sala'Así was the return to the jury of the guilty verdict

'Crime of the Sala'Miguel López, from guilty to not guilty in 43 hours