More than twenty years after the murder of Nadia Panarello, prosecutors tried Tuesday to persuade the appeals court to find her husband guilty of second-degree murder or order a new trial. by arguing that the judge reached incorrect conclusions during his trial in 2021.
• Also read:
Ernesto Fera was acquitted of murdering his wife in 2004
• Also read:
Crown calls for new trial in 2004 murder case
“According to the judge’s findings, the only way to get to the rear of the house is from the east side. And when we look at photo No. 9, we only have fresh snow, no footprints,” said Alexandre Dubois, Crown prosecutor and author of the brief appealing against Ernesto Fera's acquittal on Tuesday.
“I have to prove the identity of the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt. But I certainly don’t have to prove to you that it’s impossible to walk on water,” he continued.
This morning, the 57-year-old's fate was debated at the Quebec Court of Appeal in Montreal.
Accompanied by his two daughters and his partner, among others, Fera was attentive and unflappable.
In December 2021, he was acquitted of the premeditated murder of his wife.
On February 12, 2004, Ms. Panarello was stabbed 30 times in a bathroom of her opulent home on Rue Michel-Gamelin in Laval.
Nadia Panarello. Photo courtesy of the victim
Afterwards, Fera received more than $700,000 from the sale of the house and insurance compensation.
This enabled him to repay his creditors, who would have had significant debts.
The public prosecutor, who saw a clear motive in this, still maintains to this day that the father of the family was the perpetrator of the heinous murder.
Fresh snow
After analyzing the decision, she accuses Judge James L. Brunton of imagining a path in the evidence that would have allowed an unknown murderer to reach the back patio door during the trial.
According to prosecutors, this would be a “central” legal error in the debate.
“According to the judge's conclusions, no one comes out of neighboring houses, no one goes out of the way, no one walks in the fresh snow. “So there must be a continuous path between the front and back of the residence,” Me Dubois argued, emphasizing that this path did not exist.
It was in this house on Rue Michel-Gamelin in Laval that the dirty murder of Nadia Panarello, 38, took place on February 12, 2004. Photo courtesy
According to him, Fera would therefore have had the “completely exclusive opportunity” to kill his wife.
“From this moment on, you have all the factual conclusions to find Mr. Fera guilty on appeal or to change the sentence,” he argued.
Error or not?
For her part, the defense reiterated that, in her opinion, the judge did not make any legal error and did not conduct a silo analysis of the evidence.
“The judge was not satisfied with the way the crime scene was handled,” said Me Isabelle Lamarche, explaining the court’s conclusions. It is not the role of the Court of Appeal to reassess the evidence. »
The appeals court now has the power to dismiss the motion, supersede the judgment, or order a new trial.
Can you share information about this story?
Write to us or call us directly at 1 800-63SCOOP.