Janos N., a Győr Judge Board, who was previously acquitted of the murder, was convicted of the attack. Criminal punishment is 7 years imprisonment with 29 months of pre-trial detention.
On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal reached a second-instance decision in the case of Janos N., a Darnozel butcher who had previously murdered and acquitted his wife Judith. The first acquittal was right on the grounds that the cause of death could not be determined by the experts and the murder had not been proved.
Ms. Judit N Kovács was killed in May 2014, and her husband was accused of killing her husband, a butcher. Although a protected witness saw a man uncovering his wife's remains from a nearby sack of Jelly Meadow and countless evidence about him, the court was dismissed twice. John N. had previously abused him, so the court tried him and the victim died before his probation expired.
At the hearing two weeks ago, the prosecutor said that in the first place he believed that the findings of the truth were wrong and that the results were reasonable and unreasonable. He reiterated that the defendant refused cell information and denied his wife's fate after his arrest, but until then probably destroyed the body. He claimed that Janos was accused of fatal bodily harm because the murder could not be proved. He said that while he was following his wife's previous beatings, it was a decisive factor that the man had committed the crime and that the disposal of the body was extremely compassionate.
Injured lawyer. András Gál also wanted the accused guilty, but a different classification was made. He wanted them to say it was a murder. According to him, there was evidence that John had planned the murder in advance, made it difficult to stand trial, and had a special value in removing the remnants of his wife's internal organs. Then he said he hoped you had the perfect recipe to prevent a perfect murder.
The judge said in his reason that he still does not believe that John's death was intentionally caused by John's death and that he was still condemned to a more positive charge than murder. He emphasized the alarming increase in domestic violence and the surprisingly rough and elegant style of Judith's body. According to him, the Court of First Instance made no mistake in the reopened case. According to him, not much has been done during the proof process. In its re-examination, the Court of First Instance considered that it had taken into account all relevant conditions, including custody and property disputes. According to him, these tensions came to a standstill before the crime was committed, and Judith's decision to move home for the good of the children until the divorce was completed, the defendant remained without hesitation and sought a solution.
We've also recently shot Judit's story.