The Crown has decided to appeal the acquittal of Ernesto Fera, who was freed last month from a premeditated murder charge. The 55-year-old man was accused of murdering his wife, Nadia Panarello, by slitting her throat in 2004 in Laval.
Posted at 4:09 p.m.
Judge James Brunton, however, leaned in her favor on December 15, accepting the defense thesis, which argued that the 38-year-old mother could have been killed by a thief who would have sneaked into the Laval residence by an unlocked door.
A few jewels had been stolen from the opulent house in the Vimont district, but no trace of DNA had been found at the scene.
Ernesto Fera was arrested in 2019 for this murder, almost 15 years after the fact.
The Crown wants to appeal his acquittal because it believes, among other things, that Judge Brunton made conclusions “which are not supported by any evidence or which are based on speculation”, can we read in the notice of call.
According to the prosecution’s theory, Nadia Panarello’s husband was the only one who could have committed this murder since only a few minutes had passed between his leaving the house and the murder. He had the “exclusive opportunity,” in court jargon.
Ernesto Fera and his wife were heavily in debt at the time. Following the death of Nadia Panarello, her husband received $350,000 in life insurance, which enabled him to pay off his house mortgage and all of his debts. This is the motive of the crime, had pleaded the Crown. Especially since a few days before the murder, Ernesto Fera had tried to obtain a loan of $120,000 from an acquaintance.
Judge Brunton rejected this explanation, however, saying it made “no sense that his plan B was to kill his wife”.
With Louis-Samuel Perron, The Press