The Alicante Provincial Court has upheld detention for the two suspects in connection with the body that was found dismembered and burned near Fontcalent last June. The autopsy has not yet determined whether the victim died violently, while the defendants claim they found him dead in bed from natural causes and, frightened, disposed of the body. The court, pending the final forensic report, notes that the available evidence strongly points to a violent death and cites a risk of flight and of evidence destruction by the accused.
The events unfolded at the end of last June after a torso was discovered burning in the Fontcalent area. Days later, more human remains were located, including hands and the head of the corpse. This discovery allowed the police to identify the deceased and revealed that the now-arrested individuals lived in the victim’s house. Investigators determined that the body was dismembered at the residence with a circular saw bought just days before the incident by both suspects. Police also established that the pair withdrew money from the victim’s bank accounts after the death. A man and a 51-year-old woman, who were living in the victim’s home, were detained in connection with these facts. Although they initially invoked their right to remain silent, they later told the court that they found the victim already dead in the bed and that he had suffered a heat-related death. They said they became frightened and disposed of the body.
The two detainees are represented by lawyers Miguel Ángel Cánovas and Miguel Ángel Garijo, who challenged the prison admission ordered by the examining magistrate. The defenses argued that the cause of death had not been determined, nor whether it occurred violently, so as to justify keeping a person in custody on an assumption not supported by the objective evidence in the case. According to one attorney, the only indications of homicide rest solely on the police’s assessment that the suspect killed the victim for financial gain. The lawyers maintain that the available indications concern only desecration of a corpse for the dismemberment and economic fraud for the ATM withdrawals, with penalties ranging from three to six months for the former and from six months to four years for the latter, which they deem insufficient to justify pretrial detention.
The defense for the woman argued that there was no flight risk, given that her entire family resides in Alicante and she has no prior record.
Arguments from the court
These are the lines the Provincial Court has rejected after weighing the police findings regarding the possible involvement of the detainees. On the autopsy report, the court notes that the investigation is still in an early stage and awaits a definitive autopsy report, which is complicated by the condition of the body after the actions taken to conceal it.
The court underlines that the violence exerted on the body and the actions taken to conceal the crime, including dispersing and burning the remains to remove traces at the residence, do not align with a non-violent death as the defense suggests. The ruling emphasizes the existence of flight risk due to the severity of potential penalties and the likelihood of further concealment of evidence.
The court states that the pretrial detention ordered by the examining judge aligns with the parameters set by the Criminal Procedure Law. The record shows facts that could indicate the existence of indicators of criminal conduct. The ruling notes the likelihood of charges including homicide, desecration of a corpse, and fraud, with penalties clearly exceeding the thresholds established by law, which heighten concerns about flight and the continuation of evidence concealment.
The court highlights that the investigation yields indications of the suspects’ involvement in the events, derived from incriminating findings at the victim’s home during the search, as well as police reports documenting the purchase of the saw that could have been used for dismemberment and cash withdrawals from the victim’s account. The chamber also reminds that new evidence remains to be gathered as the case proceeds.
]}{