Jury declares defendant guilty by unanimous verdict of murdering his father-in-law in Aranda in 2024

The Jury Court issued a unanimous guilty verdict against JHL for murder, breaking and entering, theft and other offences committed in Aranda.

Jury declares defendant guilty by unanimous verdict of murdering his father-in-law in Aranda in 2024

Unanimous verdict: guilty of murder, breaking and entering and theft in Aranda de Duero

The Jury Court has declared JHL guilty by unanimous verdict of all the principal offences with which he was charged, according to burgosconecta.es. The verdict includes murder, breaking and entering, robbery with violence, use of a vehicle belonging to another, falsification of documents and assault against law enforcement officers. The court also flatly rejected any suspension of sentence or pardon request.

No mitigation for mental disorder

During deliberations, the jury examined in detail evidence relating to the defendant's mental state. Statements from neighbours, eyewitnesses and police officers ruled out that JHL suffered any alteration in his faculties of understanding and will at the time of the events. Forensic doctors confirmed this conclusion after analysing his behaviour and the actions he carried out, which undermined the defence's thesis of a possible disorder.

The offences found proved

The final verdict identifies JHL as the perpetrator of the following crimes, all declared guilty by unanimous verdict:

Mitigating circumstances considered

The jury did value as a favourable circumstance JHL's acknowledgement of the facts—although he claimed partial memory loss—made during his final statement. It also took into account the deposit of 66,000 euros made by his defence to address, in part, the civil compensation claims.

Opposing positions of prosecution and defence

The positions of the parties diverge significantly regarding the sentencing phase. The Public Prosecutor accepts only the mitigating factor of compensation for damage—excluding the assault offence—, rules out that there is a confession of penal relevance, and rejects the aggravating factor of breach of trust due to family relationship.

The private prosecution maintains an even more restrictive stance: it requests the same principal sentences, demands the maximum punishment for the murder offence and denies that any mitigating factor can be applied in favour of the defendant.

The defence, for its part, maintains that two mitigating factors must be found: effective compensation for material damage and acknowledgement of the facts. It likewise rejects the aggravating factor of family relationship, in line with the prosecutor's position. Given that the court ruled out by unanimous verdict any alteration in Lázaro Hernández's mental faculties when committing the facts, the defence has requested that the minimum sentence be applied to him, relying on the particular circumstances of the case.

The court issued a clear rejection of both suspension of custodial sentence and any proposal for pardon, total or partial, before the Government.

Source: Google News ES — Crime (es)

Read this article in the original language