Lawyer for Emerenciano Sena, wife Marcela Acuña and son Cesarthree main defendants in the woman’s murder. Cecilia Strzyzowski, They held their closing arguments on November 13 of this year.. Their main arguments were to question the evidence presented, to fault the judiciary for allegedly not properly preserving the crime scene, to doubt witnesses, and to imply that there was no definitive certainty about the death of a young woman whose body had not yet been found.
Prosecutors and the indictment called for the Sena family’s conviction, saying, “They murdered Cecilia, believing that because of their power they would go unpunished.”
Prosecutors and the complaint allege the Sena family had a plan to kill Cecilia.was last seen alive on June 2, 2023, when she entered her in-laws’ home.
Authoritarians don’t like this
The practice of professional and critical journalism is a fundamental pillar of democracy. That is why it bothers those who believe that they are the owners of the truth.
Defense of Emerenciano Senna and Marcela Acuña
According to LN, Ricardo OsunaThe social leader’s lawyer said: Prosecutors talked about this criminal plan. None of that has been proven.. If he was such a leader in planning, why did he never go to the site to check? ”, referring to the land where Cecilia’s body was allegedly burned and dumped.
He also attacked the witnesses, calling them “scripted.” And then he remembered that there was talk about the “lump”. But it wasn’t a corpse. That is why, in his opinion, “no one said that the body was that of Cecilia Strizowski.” He also criticized the lack of fingerprint checks to determine the route of Campo Rossi’s van..
And he concluded by telling the jury: “If you are not sure, please bag up all the evidence they have against Emerenciano and ask the prosecutor to resolve this case in good conscience, taking into account the principle of innocence. Lack of evidence against Emerenciano”.
then he spoke Celeste Ojedaa lawyer representing Emerenciano’s wife said:Marcela did not plan or participate in Cecilia’s murder.. “She knew something serious had happened to her son, and from there she took action to hide what had happened from her husband.”
The lawyer began talking about the messages Marcela had sent to her co-workers. Fabiana González:”I think something important happened to Caesar. i am hopelessSo he asked himself: “Will the person implementing the plan involve a third party?”
Emerenciano Sena maintains innocence of Cecilia Strzyzowski’s murder: ‘Whoever committed the crime must be held accountable’
On top of that, The lawyer said that if there had been a plan to kill Cecilia before, it makes no sense that Marcela sent César to Colonia Elisa, where several people witnessed Cecilia being hurt. For allowing Ironer to enter his home after Strizowski disappeared or even though his body was present. “There’s no point in not having a plan, because no one expected this to happen,” Ojeda said.
He denied that Marcela had ordered the body to be disposed of, saying: “Maybe those were not very pleasant words, but he told us to settle the matter.” He also denied that his client knew about the proposed trip to Ushuaia. Strizowski told multiple witnesses that Cesar suggested that Strizowski move to the south, where his mother had found him a job and a home. The lawyer asserted that: “He can say many things, from which Marcela knows… It was obvious that Cesar took care of himself.Either”.
Finally, he denies that Acuña and Cecilia were on bad terms, pointing out that Cecilia helped him when his biological grandmother died.
The lawyer concluded his defense by saying:Planning to kill someone is not the same as having no idea what happened.found out 6 hours later and did everything to hide it. “This is a vicious cover-up.”
Cesar Sena’s defense statement
lawyer Gabriela Tomljenovicdeclared in his closing argument before a popular jury that the charges against his client were unsustainable because they used “hypotheticals” and insufficient evidence.There is no certainty that Cesar was the person who caused Cecilia’s death.”.
The lawyers based their case on bone remains found at various locations during the investigation, emphasizing that the forensic anthropologist in charge of the case said the bones were completely charred and could not determine the person’s age, gender or cause of death. Nor was it possible to obtain DNA from them, he noted. In this regard, Tomljenović said:Science could not identify the name. The prosecutor wants you to post it.”.
Cecilia Strzyzowski case: Her body was burned at over 800 degrees for several hours, but no DNA could be collected.
The lawyer then cited Cecilia’s psychologist and mentioned an incident of marital violence. Lawyers say this invalidates the notion that young women were subjugated by their husbands.
Next, Tomljenovic accused the investigation of being “directed” from the beginning.Citing Officer Silva’s statement, Officer Silva spoke of a meeting at Police Station 3, where, according to his interpretation, Cecilia’s death had already been discussed with the Sena family. Establishing this working hypothesis as the central hypothesis eliminated other possible lines of investigation, according to the lawyers.
The lawyer also discussed the Google searches that Cesar allegedly conducted, noting that because the accounts were opened on different devices and no IP address testing was done, it was not possible, in her view, to definitively determine who each query corresponded to. He also spoke about the material obtained from surveillance cameras and questioned the storage process and lack of experts to protect this evidence.
Regarding the search of the house, the lawyer said that the specialized dog did not find anything during the operation on June 9, but that Cecilia’s bones and a burnt wallet were found 15 days later, on June 24. No security was posted at the location between one proceeding and the next, suggesting someone may have placed evidence there, the attorney said..
Finally, he delivered a powerful message directly to the jury.Saying “not guilty” does not mean denying someone’s pain.. It is a recognition that the State has failed to prove that Cesar Sena is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the only thing that is compatible with the Constitution and the law is Not guilty verdict”.
HM/DCQ
About The Author
