Attack in a country house
The High Court of Justice of the Balearic Islands, TSJIB, reviewed a case brought by the defense of Pau Rigo, a senior resident from Porreres who claimed a putative acquittal. The case centers on a confrontation during a house invasion, where the court examined whether Rigo fired to kill the intruder or acted under imminent threat. The decision originally rested on conflicting parts of the judgment: one section stated the jury, by a narrow margin, held Rigo responsible for murder, while another portion indicated Rigo acted to defend himself and others under serious danger. The defense pressed for an acquittal based on self defense and diminished responsibility due to compromised judgment and impaired will. In this stage, the TSJIB annulled the prior ruling but did not resolve the question of the penalty.
The core argument from the defense insists that the legal effects of an acquittal or a conviction come from the punishment that follows, not from the annulment itself. The defense argued against prejudging the outcome of the pending sentence and against potential harm caused by a prolonged delay or misinterpretation of the legal consequences.
Consequently, the question now turns to the sentence itself for two residents linked to the incident in a country setting: the thief who died during the robbery, who is also charged with wounding, and the elderly man accused of murder by the Prosecutor’s Office. The focus remains on how the court will balance responsibility and threat in a case marked by fear and force.
Facts on trial
The events unfolded at a rural house in Porreres in February 2018. Pau Rigo, then 83 years old, faced a murder charge for the death of the robber. An associate, Fredy Escobar, together with Marcos Rotger and José Antonio Sánchez, stood accused of planning and carrying out the robbery.
During the theft, Escobar and Rigo, who was then 78, grabbed a shotgun and fired, resulting in the victim’s death. The prosecutor sought a four-year term for the retiree, while the family of the deceased robber asked for a harsher sentence, up to fifteen years for murder.
Earlier, Rigo had fallen victim to another robbery a few months prior. Rotger and Sánchez were found guilty of planning that earlier crime. In testimony, Rigo described his moment of fear and claimed he panicked, stating that he did not intend to shoot. Yet when the intruders saw the shotgun, their reaction shifted toward aggression, rather than submission.
In the initial verdict, the jury favored pardoning Rigo, while the other defendants were found guilty. This contrast underpins the ongoing legal debate about culpability, intent, fear, and the proper interpretation of self defense in the context of a violent home invasion. (Cited by TSJIB observers)