The second hearing in the trial of a man accused of strangling his father on 25 December 2022 took place on Wednesday.
The defendant, who mumbled and spoke slowly in court, maintained that he did not intend to kill his father. He claimed he had only wanted to “calm him down” during an argument.
When confronted by the judge, who noted that strangulation typically takes two to three minutes to cause death, the accused stated, “I didn’t know a human could die so quickly,” adding, “I know from my own experience with the stranglehold that you lose consciousness.” The judge sharply criticised him for not simply leaving the situation, stating that strangling someone and not intending harm are “incompatible.”
The accused has yet to provide a clear explanation for the argument that led to the incident. He suggested it was related to his parents’ relationship and his father’s refusal to go on a family holiday.
During the hearing, the defendant claimed he had been rebuilding his life after a long prison sentence. However, this assertion was challenged when evidence revealed he had repeatedly driven without a licence, sometimes under the influence of alcohol, and had used drugs.
On the night of the incident, the accused’s then girlfriend, who has since become his wife, accompanied him to his father’s house. She reportedly did not witness the strangulation, as she was inebriated and had gone to lie down in another room. She stated that she was awakened by the accused, who called her into the living room where he and his father were lying on the floor. “It’s too late, he’s dead,” he allegedly told her.
A neighbour testified to hearing an unusual “bang” on the evening of 25 December 2022 but was unaware of the events unfolding in the flat above. The neighbour described the accused as a “nice person” who often went shopping and shared pizza with his father on Saturdays, adding that he had no idea their relationship was strained.
The daughter of the accused’s wife also spoke in his defence, stating that while she was partly aware of his criminal past, she did not judge him for that since he made her mother happy.
Following the incident, the accused and his wife attempted to disguise the crime scene to make it appear as though a burglary had taken place. When questioned by the judge about how this decision was made, the defendant’s partner was unable to provide a clear explanation. She also struggled to answer when asked if she knew exactly how the victim had died.
The woman echoed her husband’s claim that he had only intended to “calm down” his father by placing him in a “headlock”. She speculated that the two men had fallen during the altercation, which may have led to the fracture of the father’s hyoid bone. She claimed that this was the version of events her husband told her. The judge reprimanded her, stating, “The man died because he was strangled.” The witness responded, “I don’t know that.”
After the incident, the couple decided never to discuss what had happened again. In general, the witness left many questions unanswered during her testimony. When asked whether she believed individuals should take responsibility for their actions, she did not provide a direct response. Similarly, when questioned about whether she never feared her husband could pose a danger to her, she replied, “That thought never occurred to me.”
The judge also confronted her with her initial statements to the examining magistrate, in which she had mentioned possible premeditation. At the time, she had stated, “He told me that one day he would kill his father, but I didn’t take him seriously.” During Wednesday’s hearing, however, she claimed to have no memory of this.
At the end of the hearing, two members of the victim’s family, who had learned about the trial through media reports, came forward. They have filed a civil suit and are each seeking €32,000 in damages.
Trial for fatal assault begins: Man accused of strangling his 71-year-old father
