The trial of Jonathan Massari, accused of conspiracy and murder of four Mafia-linked people in 2016, was aborted three weeks ago after a prosecution witness, a former organized crime killer, during his testimony, made unacceptable and damaging statements to the accused. .
Posted at 5:10 PM
The embargo prevents us from revealing much of this inadmissible and controlling evidence, but Justice Michel Pineau of the Supreme Court has agreed to make his reasons for making a failed trial public by following the steps I have taken. Journalism.
Jonathan Massari, 41, is accused of plotting and killing Lorenzo Giordano, Rocco Sollecito and brothers Vincenzo and Giuseppe Valdoto.
Three of the victims were shot and killed by a mafia killer who later cooperated with the police and registered Masari and other accomplices without their knowledge in 2019.
This former mole-turned-murderer–whose name we must silence–testified for a day at Massari’s trial and at its conclusion, the accused’s attorney, Mr.e Philippe La Rochelle announced that he would file an application for an unsuccessful trial, which was accepted by Judge Pineau.
“The civilian secret agent (ACI) involved in the Préméditer project is a particularly unusual and difficult witness. He is very talkative. He constantly goes beyond the range of questions put to him. He sprinkles his answers with comments and opinions. He loses his temper to the point where he seems to be unable to stop. He jumps from one thing to another. another so quickly that it is extremely difficult to put his answers into context and fully understand their content, both at once and after the fact.”
“Having him testify against the accused, Jonathan Massari, poses additional challenges. Immigration and Customs Enforcement harbors a resentment toward him that seems unable to contain. For example, during his flights, when he attributes to the accused some crime or dishonest maneuver, he can treat him as A rat, a cockroach, a moron, or a miser,” the judge wrote in his 13-page decision on a trial abortion request.
Judge Benno concluded that the jury’s warning about the inadmissible remarks of the former killer would have been without effect and that the only possible remedy was to abort the trial for a new trial as soon as possible.
The judge asked the prosecution and defense to propose “outside the box” solutions so that the former killer’s testimony would be better framed to avoid another miscarriage of trial.
The claim is represented by a.e Isabel Boleyn, M.e Mary Christine Goodbot, M.e Karen Kordo and M.e Catherine Chitoyan, suggested an elusive solution: that the ACI be examined and cross-examined by video, in the presence of the judge but without the jury, before the start of the next trial, so that would be inadmissible. The information in the evidence that might result is then cut out and the video questioning is finally presented to the jury during the trial.
But Judge Michel Pineau rejected that proposal on Tuesday morning, concluding that the need for such a measure was “premature.”
He said, among other things, that testimony given without a jury present would constitute hearsay but there could be exceptions. He noted that the jury would not enjoy the answers of the witness as if the testimony had taken place before them in the courtroom, but they did not completely rule out the feasibility of this.
Further discussions will take place next week to “define the framework for ICA certification”.
Future jurors will be called to the upcoming new trial on November 21.
To contact Daniel Renaud, call 514285-7000, ext. 4918, write to firstname.lastname@example.org or write to the postal address of Journalism.