The trial with popular jury against I.C.N., a woman accused of allegedly murdering a 77-year-old man with reduced mobility by arson, began this Monday at the Provincial Court of the Balearic Islands, in Ibiza. The facts judged occurred in the early morning of August 3, 2023 in a house located in ses Païsses, in the municipality of Sant Antoni, where the victims lived.
The prosecution argues that the defendant acted with premeditation and malice aforethought, setting fire to the home with the clear intent to kill the man, according to the opening statement of the trial.
For this reason, he is requesting a permanent revisable prison sentence for a crime of murder and another of arson, as well as compensation of 273,289 euros to the family of the deceased.
Perverse” plan
During the oral hearing, which began with the reading of the prosecution and defense briefs, both the prosecution and the private prosecution agreed that I.C.N. set fire to the house “with the intention of ending the lives” of its occupants.
One of them, 77-year-old Francisco López Mena, died of asphyxiation and burns because he was unable to escape due to his disability.
According to the prosecution, between 01:30 and 02:00 a.m., the defendant left her home covering her face, as shown by security cameras, and walked to the victims’ home, to which she gained access using a key.
She maintained a sentimental relationship with the son of the deceased, who at the time was admitted to the psychiatric ward of the Can Misses hospital.
Once inside, he set fire with a lighter or a match to the sofa in the living room and placed some cushions in the garage, right next to the vehicle’s engine, which were also set on fire. Francisco slept in one of the rooms, while his wife Antonia, 74 years old and suffering from Alzheimer’s, was rescued with a caregiver.
The man died from carbon monoxide poisoning and second-degree burns over 80% of his body, according to expert evidence. The doors of the house were not forced, and the keys were only in the possession of the children, in addition to the defendant, who had lived in the house until July of the same year.
In addition, the prosecutor stated that the defendant “leaves her doorway covering herself so as not to be seen by the camera, wearing black glasses and a zebra bag. When she returns at 2:31 a.m. she comes back with different clothes, but with the same sneakers and the same bag”.
In addition, he said that these “slippers and purse were found in the house search of the accused”, who has not yet provided “any official version of what she did that night”.
“There is no alibi,” he said.
The prosecutor pointed out that the evidence is found in 54 security camera recordings that show her leaving and returning to her home between 1:04 and 2:31 wearing different clothes, but the same sneakers and purse.
Likewise, one of the agents declared that the fire was intentional, and that I.C.N., despite suffering from schizoaffective disorder, “knew perfectly well what he was doing and had the will to do it”, without showing any nervousness or empathy at the time of the events.
The defense denies authorship and speaks of “conjecture”.
For its part, the defense of I.C.N. “expressly and categorically” denied its involvement in the facts, describing the accusation as unfounded.
“The accusation that they maintain towards my client is not real, is being unfairly accused“The defense attorney pointed out that the jury has “a very big responsibility, that the defendant loses her freedom or recovers it”.
In addition, he said that“I am convinced of my innocence” and that the accusation was born “because of a personal suspicion: one of the daughters says ‘I suspect I'”.
Regarding his client’s silence, he explained that “the defense does not have to prove innocence. It is the prosecution that has to prove it. They are opinions, suspicions, doubts, but he has not demonstrated anything firm”.
He also argued at the hearing that “nno evidence has been requested during the investigation. There is nothing. I don’t know how it got here.” .
In addition, he has remarked some “contradictions” in how the fire was started and in the times when the accused allegedly goes to the house. And he said his defense will focus on three points: the keys, the security cameras and the sketch of the house.
He maintained that the entire proceeding has been based on the police report of the Guardia Civil, with no direct or conclusive evidence linking his client to the crime.
In addition, he questioned the contradictions in the schedules and in the versions about the start of the fire. He criticized the fact that in the more than two years of investigation no key evidence had been requested and defended the principle of presumption of innocence. “When in doubt, you can’t convict,” he stressed.
The trial will continue for eight days
The oral hearing will last for eight sessions spread over two weeks, during which testimony and expert evidence will be heard. The private prosecution, on behalf of the family of the deceased, also argues that there is sufficient evidence to find the defendant guilty, based on the doctrine of circumstantial evidence.
