Death at Mels carnival Accused: "Someone is dead, I have to live with it" +++ Lawyer blames the crime on alcohol

Homicide Mels

Gasthof zum Schäfli in Mels was the scene of a homicide.

Image: Maps

The trial takes place in the parish hall in Mels.

Image: blue News

Homicide Mels

Gasthof zum Schäfli in Mels was the scene of a homicide.

Image: Maps

The trial takes place in the parish hall in Mels.

Image: blue News

A schoolboy in a bunny costume, a pizzaiolo on drugs - and a fatal night with unclear dynamics: the Mels murder case is once again before the court. At the center of the case is the question of culpability.

• Liveticker

  New posts
• Liveticker closed
12.14 p.m.

Verdict still to come today

The judge gives the defendant the last word. He says: "I can only express my regret. I am very sorry for what has happened."

The court then retires for the sentencing hearing. The sentencing hearing will take place at 5.00 pm.

12.08 p.m.

"The accused was partly lying on the dead man and asleep"

There was a lack of culpability. It was clear that the accused had been drinking alcohol. He had been drinking at the carnival from the very beginning, which is also consistent with the witness statements, the lawyer clarifies.

Regarding the night of the crime, the lawyer says: "The accused was partly lying next to and partly on top of the dead man and was asleep. When questioned by the police, he said that he had had to fight a Russian soldier." This shows the psychotic state or hallucinations the accused was suffering from.

The accused was surprised by the effects of the alcohol. The offense was not self-inflicted. The accused should therefore be acquitted of guilt and punishment. "The hair and urine sample could not prove that the accused was given knockout drops, but the investigation cannot rule it out either," says the lawyer. He had never been so out of his depth with alcohol as he was that night. That's why the accused thinks that there must have been more at play.

11.59 a.m.

Now the defendant's defense attorney speaks

The defendant's lawyer now steps up to the lectern. She begins her plea.

"He has no memory of the night of the crime. But that doesn't change the fact that he has to live with the fact that he killed a person."

The lawyer criticized the media coverage. This has affected the accused. The trial also affected him professionally. He lost his job because of the trial.

11.37 a.m.

The private plaintiffs stick to their demands

After the public prosecutor, it is the turn of the private plaintiffs' defense counsel.

In the view of the private plaintiffs, a second expert opinion was rightly required. The expert assumes complete incapacity. Nevertheless, it should be noted that only a very hypothetical assessment can be made.

The private plaintiff maintains the claims that were previously made. The defendant is to pay compensation of 140,000 francs and compensation for the funeral in the amount of 12,000 francs.

"Three years ago, the siblings had to part with their beloved brother," says the defense lawyer at the end.

11.28 a.m.

Public prosecutor adheres to the sentence

The judge gives the public prosecutor the floor. He steps up to the lectern and begins his presentation.

The first expert opinion decides that the defendant must be assumed to be fully incapable of guilt. The second expert opinion says the same.

"It can be assumed that he was solely under the influence of alcohol at the time of the offense," says the public prosecutor. The public prosecutor stands by the sentence demanded. He demands a 24-month prison sentence. This should be suspended for two years.

11.22 a.m.

"I hope I have the chance of a normal life"

The court wants to know: "Where do you see yourself in ten years?" The defendant replies: "One wish is that the trial is over. I hope that I have a chance of a relatively normal life."

11.21 a.m.

The accused is in therapy

The accused is currently undergoing psychotherapy. It had been difficult to find a psychiatrist. He had been turned away because many psychiatrists did not want to deal with such a serious case, the accused said.

The judge then asks how the accused is dealing with the crime. First he pauses. Then he says: "As far as I'm concerned, this is certainly a good way. It's difficult to explain how I deal with it. Thanks to those around me, I can deal with it better."

11.13 a.m.

"I don't keep a log of how much beer I drink in the evening"

"How much alcohol do you drink?" asks the judge. The defendant says: "The hair analysis shows that I don't drink. I also have no desire to drink. I already had respect for alcohol before and after the event I have even more respect for it. I'm seriously considering abstinence."

The conversation with the judge now focuses on alcohol consumption. The defendant says: "I don't keep a log of how much beer I drink in the evening." The judge follows up and asks whether he has been drinking in the last four months. The defendant says "no".

11.10 a.m.

"I'm glad, nothing new comes to mind"

The judge wants to know whether anything new has occurred to the accused. He says: "Nothing new has occurred to me and I am actually glad that nothing new has occurred. I tried to remember for myself what happened, but I can't remember anything."

The defendant sits calmly and straight in his chair. He talks quietly to the judge. The conversation turns to the night and whether the accused was given knockout drops. The accused simply could not remember.

11.05 a.m.

Now it continues - the accused is questioned

The judge continues the trial. He now questions the accused. How are you?" The accused says: "Right now my heart is beating really hard. It's a big burden. One person has died. I have to live with that for the rest of my life. I've now started therapy to deal with it better. My environment helps me a lot."

"I was called the 'umbrella killer' in the newspaper. I think it's self-explanatory what that does to you. But I don't want to position myself as a victim."

10.52 a.m.

Break, we'll continue in a moment

The judge closes the questioning of the expert witness.

This is followed by a ten-minute break.

10.45 a.m.

"I don't believe that the accused deliberately wanted to stab the victim in the eye"

The prosecution and defense are now allowed to ask the expert witness questions. The public prosecutor wants to know how the accused can make clear statements after the crime, but could not have known what was happening at the time of the crime. The forensic expert says this is normal. "It would require a high level of criminal energy to commit such an act and to behave so calmly afterwards."

"I don't believe that the accused deliberately wanted to stab the victim in the eye. We see this kind of behavior time and again, which is undoubtedly not inculpable, for example in cases of schizophrenia," explains the forensic scientist. If intoxication exceeds a certain level, a person is no longer able to defend themselves or behave differently.

10.32 a.m.

The crime places a massive burden on the accused

"How do you assess the alcohol consumption now?" the judge asks the forensic scientist. He replies: "You could say that the accused is not very impressed by the crime. I can carry on as before. That's not how I've experienced the accused. I know people like that who are not impressed. I have investigated many hundreds of offenders. The accused deviates massively from such offenders."

It is very unlikely that the accused was pretending to the expert. The crime had put considerable strain on the accused during the investigation. He had feelings of guilt towards his closest friends. He was very grateful that friends stood by him.

10.27 a.m.

The accused does not deviate from society

The expert lists the disorders and illnesses that were not found in the accused. "The accused in no way deviates from the social group at his age." He is committed, he is interested, he is reliable in his studies and there is no evidence of a propensity for violence.

Should the accused fall into such an alcohol intoxication again, the expert sees no reason why the accused would repeat such an act. Nevertheless, the forensic expert advises the accused to undergo therapy. And for the reason of protecting the accused.

10.17 a.m.

According to the expert witness, the accused accidentally hit the victim's eye with the umbrella

The judge wants to know from the expert witness how it could be that the defendant struck the eye socket with the umbrella when the victim was already lying motionless on the ground after the fight. The expert replied: "From a purely anatomical point of view, it is accidental, especially when drunk, where you hit with the umbrella. And secondly, it was an excess of violence, where you do something without thinking. So hitting someone in a frenzy or, in this specific case, stabbing them in the head with the umbrella."

10.03 am

The accused was close to the extreme

The judge summarizes: "You have established a high level of alcohol intoxication in the defendant. You have assessed the concrete effects on the defendant's insight and ability to control."

The expert answered the question of culpability as follows: "It is the most delicate interface between forensic psychiatry and the law. If I examine all of this, then the accused no longer had any leeway to act like a healthy, competent person."

The accused was very close to the extreme when comparing an absolutely healthy person and a severely mentally ill person. Alcohol can lead to complete unconsciousness and then even to death, explained the expert. So the question of culpability had to be assessed here.

09.54 a.m.

The accused was not used to drinking alcohol

"You cannot assume habitual drinking behavior," says the expert. This means that the accused is not used to consuming a lot of alcohol, let alone being addicted to it.

The expert found no evidence that the accused was addicted. He explains: "As soon as you consume alcohol because it makes you feel better or you feel you can cope better with certain situations, you could be talking about an addiction."

09.40 hrs

Delusions and psychotic symptoms

Expert's assessment: "The accused was intoxicated. He had signs of delusions, i.e. psychotic symptoms. The accused spoke of Russian soldiers who had threatened him. This puts us in the range of severe intoxication."

09.38 a.m.

He had had at least one "movie tear"

The statements of the accused, but also of witnesses, have shown that there was acute alcohol intoxication at the time of the crime. The professor says: "His statements were prototypically plausible for severe intoxication. The defendant made consistent statements about his perception and behavior."

He had had at least one "movie break". The accused had gaps in his memory. He had said self-critically that he had difficulty remembering what had really happened and what had not. He showed clear time disturbances. In other words, he could not tell the time.

After the crime, the accused fell asleep next to the victim. "But you can't speak of falling asleep, but of total exhaustion. In addition, the accused did not cover up after the crime," says the expert witness.

09.30 a.m.

Alcohol consumption is not unusual

The professor says: "On the first level, no mental disorder can be perceived for this consumption behavior. It does not indicate a dependency syndrome." A fifth of the Swiss population is said to consume a lot of alcohol, but this cannot be explained by a disorder or addiction.

09.16 a.m.

"There is no mental disorder"

A professor of forensic psychiatry is given the floor at the beginning. He has prepared the new expert opinion on the accused.

The judge asks: "You have an expert opinion with the question of whether the accused has a mental disorder. How did you proceed?" He replies: "It was a standard procedure. I didn't have all the documents and records, but I then examined the accused." The hair sample was negative.

"The assessment came to the conclusion that the defendant had no mental disorders. However, at the time of the offense, it is clear that the defendant was under a strong alcohol intoxication," says the professor.

The accused felt threatened at the time of the crime. At the time of the offense, it can be assumed that he was no longer guilty. "The risk of recidivism is very low. I have stated that the accused could benefit from voluntary therapy and voluntary abstinence," explains the professor.

09.12 a.m.

12,000 francs compensation for the private plaintiffs

Now the judge summarizes the charges. The trial began a year ago in February. Now the trial is being continued. So this is not a new trial. The motions are read out again so that everyone is up to date.

The private sponsors are demanding compensation of CHF 12,000.

The defense demands a full acquittal.

09.08 a.m.

The judge opens the trial

Dozens of spectators and many media representatives are sitting in the courtroom. The judge introduces those present.

The private plaintiffs are seated on the left side of the courtroom. Five people have filed private charges against the accused. On the right side of the courtroom sits the accused with his defense lawyer.

Thursday, May 22, 08.58 a.m.

The trial begins

The trial for the homicide at Fasnacht 2022 takes place today in the parish hall in Mels SG. The accused is alleged to have killed a 45-year-old man in a bunny costume.

The case had already been heard in February 2024. At that time, the proceedings were interrupted due to a new expert opinion, which has now been drawn up. A verdict is expected on Friday.

Show more

What began as an exuberant carnival night ended in tragedy: Salvatore N., a popular pizzaiolo, was found dead outside his hotel room in the early hours of February 26, 2022 - his suspected murderer was lying next to him, fast asleep, wearing a bunny costume.

The alleged perpetrator: a 19-year-old cantonal school student at the time, who is now on trial for intentional homicide while insane at the Werdenberg-Sarganserland District Court. According to the indictment, the young man faces 24 months' imprisonment - suspended for a probationary period of two years. 47 days of pre-trial detention have already been credited.

The trial was already heard in February 2024: Now, on Thursday and Friday, the case will be reopened. blue News reports from the scene.

A night-time crash with a fatal outcome

According to the investigation, the fatal night began at home with beer. The student slipped into a bunny costume, took the train to Mels and celebrated carnival with friends - with plenty of alcohol, both on the train and later at the Verrucano cultural center.

At the same time, Salvatore N., himself drunk and under the influence of cocaine, went to his hotel room. The student followed him a short time later - it remains unclear why. In the room, the allegedly homosexual pizza chef is said to have grabbed his young visitor's genitals.

What followed is described by the prosecution as a brutal escalation: the student rejected the advances and wanted to leave - but Salvatore N. apparently stood in his way. A violent scuffle ensued, which moved into the corridor. There, the 19-year-old choked the man to the ground, then grabbed an umbrella that happened to be lying around - and stabbed the victim once in each eye.

The injuries resulted in fatal traumatic brain injuries.

Not guilty - but confronted with claims in the millions

According to an expert opinion, the pupil had an alcohol level of between 1.21 and 2.09 per mille at the time of the crime - legally, he is therefore considered legally incompetent. Salvatore N. even had a blood alcohol level of 2.15 per mille.

Nevertheless, the crime remains shocking. The victim's family is demanding 650,000 francs in damages and 140,000 francs in compensation.

The trial has already been heard on February 1 and 2, 2024. Now the trial is being reopened. A new expert opinion is set to change the case.