He wears the dress of his father, murdered in Corsica in 2012, his mentor who taught him to fight against injustice. Me Paul Sollacaro has multiplied incidents before the Alpes-Maritimes juries for three weeks until he angered the court and jury and angered the civil parties. The 30 years demanded against his client Nahed Daada, the manager of the La Terrazza restaurant, would probably not appease him.
On Friday morning he gets up defensively, emaciated face, dark eyes and borrows a quote from Nietzsche in the foreword. “The enemy of truth is not lies, but beliefs. There is drama, tragedy and injustice committed by men who thought they were right.”
The criminal attacks “a grainy file with certainties gnawing away from the start”. It brings to light procedural flaws: the examining magistrate forgot to refer the accused to the arrest and imprisonment of Frédéric Casstellano. You were erased for these facts. On the other hand, they face charges of kidnapping and forced detention between July 29 (date of disappearance) and August 18. “Why August 18?” “And if Mr. Castellano, as proposed by the Advocate General, died of a heart attack on August 19, how do we do that? “How can you kidnap someone without arresting them, kidnap them without arresting them.” What the hell is this legal mess?” The penalty is carried away.
“What starts badly ends badly”, he repeats several times. The accusation stuck in his throat. “One hour, ten minutes of it for me, 30 years in Lugrezi, 30 years for Daada. Not even a minute a year in jail, doesn’t that bother you?” Same outrage at the qualification of “Followed by Death”, added at the very end of the investigation. “As a result, the sentence imposed will not be twenty years, but life. The icing on the cake, as Daada said during the debates.”
Me Sollacaro is angry. You can see that, you can hear that: “We didn’t look for Mr. Castellano because we didn’t want to find him.” In 2015, a body was discovered in Ventimiglia. “Compare-t-on les ADN? Not.” On August 18, the computer expert said it would be interesting to check the IP addresses of the disappeared to find out the latest consultations. “Are we going to do it? No.”
The defense attorney has the jury testify: “Mr. Castellano had three telephone lines. Only one interests the investigators. If it’s you, there in the cell, what do you think?”
While the burden of proof rests with the Advocate General, the Advocate uses an accusation that he feels is insufficiently substantiated to attack the prosecution and the Investigative Chamber: “I’ve been waiting for a scenario. Nothing. What a judicial outrage it was to have to humiliate ourselves in front of the Castellano family to prove that imprisonment at La Terrazza was impossible, as the corpse of her father, her husband, her brother could not be extracted from a crowded restaurant .”
Why did Nahed Daada jump out of a window while in police custody in December 2016? Isn’t that an admission of guilt? “I see it as an act of desperation. Like a Patrick Dils signing his confession to go home.”replies the defense attorney, who asks the jury to acquit Nahed Daada in order to return him to his children, his family “After six years of nightmare” . The relatives of the accused are in tears, the support sounded. The verdict is expected in the afternoon. Thirty years or acquittal? Regardless of the outcome, there is a strong possibility that this puzzling case will be judged a second time on appeal.