The man who suffered an axe attack at the hands of two neighbours outside his home in the municipality of Santa Úrsula, in Tenerife, sustained “minor injuries”. This was stated by the forensic experts from the Institute of Legal Medicine of Santa Cruz de Tenerife during the trial held in the Second Section of the Provincial Court. “These injuries did not pose any vital risk to the victim, as the blows were struck with little intensity,” the experts reported. To provide the court with a clearer image of the limited severity of the injuries, the forensic experts added that of the three wounds the victim had on his head, “one required four stitches while the other two only needed dressings.”
During the first session of the trial, the victim stated that “his neighbours wanted to kill him” and that they used an axe and a large knife during the attack. Brothers J. M. D. P. and D. D. P. had harboured grudges against the victim for years until everything escalated that day. The victim claimed he had repeatedly called their attention not to throw stones at the cars passing on the motorway or for other issues. On the day of the attack, he had confronted them again, but he did not expect the alleged violent response from the brothers. One armed with an axe and the other with a knife, they attacked him “brutally” until the victim managed to take refuge inside his own house.
However, on Wednesday, the forensic doctors asserted that the injuries sustained by the victim were not serious, and the other injuries that the victim claimed to have incurred that day were actually due to arthritis he had suffered from for years. “It is impossible that the injury to the neck was caused during the attack because the pain would have been very intense, and the victim reported nothing when examined,” they confirmed. The victim suffered intense pain from a severe osteoarthritis that forced him to take strong painkillers.
Biological traces on the axe
Traces of DNA from J. M. D. P. were found on the handle of the axe, while the biological remains on the blade belonged to the accused and the victim. However, the forensics made it clear that no blood from the victim was found on the blade. When questioned by the parties about the possibility of biological traces being found on the knife allegedly wielded by D. D. P., they indicated that there was no knife mentioned in the proceedings and that they “weren’t sent any weapon of this type for analysis, just the axe.”
The Public Prosecutor maintained, at the end of the second session of the trial, its demand for 12 years in prison for each of the two accused for an offence of attempted murder and that they should face compensation of 28,100 euros in addition to the damages incurred to the victim’s access doors and a moped belonging to him.
The defence, on the other hand, modified its initial statement and requested full acquittal. And in case the court finds them guilty, they requested the application of mitigating circumstances for mental health issues, complete exemption due to intoxication, and exemption for drug use. If the mitigating circumstances are not deemed applicable, they presented alternative arguments for highly qualified mitigations due to drug and alcohol use and emotional turmoil.
Exterior of the Court Palace of Santa Cruz de Tenerife. / El Día
Victim’s claim
The complainant is claiming 5,600 euros for material damage and the injuries suffered, while the Canary Islands Health Service (SCS) seeks to recover a medical bill of 16,500 euros.
The forensic experts pointed out that the victim suffers from a diagnosed histrionic personality disorder that has been ongoing for years. This behaviour, they said, is characterised by “wanting to be the centre of attention, which may have influenced his account of how the events unfolded.” The experts indicated it was possible that the complainant exaggerated what actually occurred, aligning with the evidence of the injuries sustained, which were diagnosed as very minor for having been caused with an axe. They even corroborated that with those injuries “there was no intention to kill anyone.” In fact, the forensic experts noted that the victim, after being taken to a hospital, requested voluntary discharge on the same day of his admission.
According to two police officers’ statements in the first session, the victim was unable to testify as he was hospitalised, something that the experts refuted and denied that his hospitalisation had been due to serious injuries.
The neighbours who heard the commotion and went to assist the assaulted individual reported that they managed to wrest the axe from one of the brothers. They were “out of control” and were breaking everything in their path, such as the access doors and the moped. None of the neighbours, who came as witnesses, claimed to have seen the accused assault the victim and only remembered that at one point they shouted: “Now you won’t look at us badly again.” The trial has been adjourned for a verdict.
Subscribe to continue reading
