Defense lawyers demand acquittal in Lucerne jewelry robbery trial
Published: Wednesday, Jan 24th 2024, 18:10
Volver a Live Feed
In the trial for a jewelry robbery in Lucerne, the defence lawyers for the five alleged organizers and helpers demanded full or extensive acquittals on Wednesday. A partial acquittal was also demanded for the actual robber.
The 46-year-old Montenegrin is accused of robbing the Gübelin jewelry store on Lucerne's Schwanenplatz in 2017 and 2019, stealing jewelry and watches worth three and 20 million francs respectively. He was also accused of two attempted robberies at the same jewelry store.
The accused confessed, but denied the 2017 robbery. He resisted being held responsible for every attempt to rob Gübelin, said his defense lawyer. He pleaded for a prison sentence of seven years and a ten-year ban from the country. The public prosecutor's office had demanded a sentence of eleven years and an expulsion from the country of 15 years.
The trial focused on the 20 million franc robbery in 2019, which the prosecution alleges was organized and carried out by the robber and five other men using a division of labour. An accomplice was also hired for the actual robbery.
Comprehensive statements
This accomplice made extensive statements to the investigators. He will be sentenced in a separate and shortened trial and thus receive a sentence of less than five years.
The statements of the accomplice play an important role in the indictment. Several defence lawyers criticized this "key witness", who had said contradictory things "at the drop of a hat" and "served up lies". He had shown exaggerated testimony in view of a lenient sentence.
The public prosecutor demanded prison sentences of seven to ten years for the other five co-defendants. Those who do not have a Swiss passport should also be deported from the country for 15 years.
Robber claims to have planned crime alone
The robber had testified before the court that he had planned the crime alone. The defense lawyers based their pleas in favor of the five co-defendants on this statement, among others.
There was a lack of evidence that his client was the big shot, said the defence lawyer for a 57-year-old North Macedonian who is said to have been one of the main organizers of the robbery. He therefore demanded an acquittal. His client was just a pawn when he bought the flight ticket for the accomplice.
According to the indictment, all the threads of the organization came together in the case of a 50-year-old Montenegrin. It was a big mistake for him to accept the stolen goods, said his two defense lawyers. However, he was only guilty of receiving stolen goods and should therefore be given a conditional custodial sentence of 18 months.
However, there was a lack of evidence to support the accusation that the accused had played a role in the planning and execution of the crime. There was no evidence that he frequented the Lucerne brothel that served as the "control center of the crime", explained one of the defense lawyers.
Only favors
The operator of the brothel, a 32-year-old Swiss man, was also on trial. He is said to have supported the robbery by providing the perpetrators with rooms as accommodation and a meeting place. There was no reason for the perpetrators to take a risk and involve the drug addict in the robbery, said the defense lawyer. His client had been caught up in a story of which he had no idea. He should therefore be acquitted.
Another defendant, a 38-year-old Bosnian, is said to have participated in the robbery by providing chauffeur services and organizing accommodation. He had only done favors, said his defence lawyer, and also demanded an acquittal for the offences relating to the robbery.
According to the defense lawyer, a 61-year-old Swiss man should also be acquitted. The former Gübelin employee is said to have provided the information that made the robbery possible in the first place. How, when and where his client is said to have passed on the insider knowledge is not stated in the indictment, said his defense lawyer.
The defense lawyer argued that other people could also have passed on insider knowledge. Apparently, however, a scapegoat had to be found. His client had become involved in the proceedings through no fault of his own.
In his reply, the public prosecutor rejected the criticism of the main prosecution witness. It was not clear why he should incriminate innocent people, he said.
The verdict will be announced in writing at a later date.
©Keystone/SDA
Spanish 
English 
German 
French 
Arabic