[B-0]22190[B-1]
[B-2]Sentence issued for Sweet Waters crime He will be tried for two felonies and two misdemeanors[B-3]
[B-4][B-5]The [B-6]way[B-7]has opened[B-8] for the [B-9]referral[B-10] to [B-11]trial[B-12] of Bambi [B-13]Anagnostopoulos[B-14] at the Mixed Jury Court of Athens to stand trial for the brutal [B-15]murder[B-16] of his wife and mother of his child [B-17]Caroline[B-18] Krauts.[B-19][B-20]Specifically, in a [B-21]verdict[B-22] issued today by the Athens Plenary Council, the 33-year-old detained pilot [B-23]is[B-24]put on trial for [B-25]two[B-26] [B-27]felonies[B-28], [B-29]manslaughter[B-30] with [B-31]intent[B-32] committed[B-33] while in a calm mental state[B-34] and [B-35]abuse[B-36] [B-37]of an animal[B-38] and for [B-39]two misdemeanors[B-40], [B-41]false[B-42] [B-43]reporting[B-44] for making others suspicious of his actions and [B-45]making a false statement[B-46] repeatedly.[B-47][B-48]The [B-49]judges[B-50]-members of the judicial council [B-51]unanimously[B-52] adopted the "catapult" proposal submitted last November by prosecutor George Noulis. In his 24-page proposal [B-53]the prosecutor had described frame by frame[B-54] the scene of the savage crime staged by the accused in the [B-55]maisonette[B-56] of Sweet Waters.[B-57][B-58]According to the prosecution, the defendant [B-59]manipulated[B-60] and controlled the unfortunate [B-61]Caroline[B-62], going so far as to allow her to [B-63]use[B-64] [B-65]taxis[B-66] for her [B-67]transportation[B-68] belonging to a friend.[B-69][B-70]In his motion, the prosecutor, citing the testimony of a mental health counselor who visited the couple, stated that the young woman "experienced her relationship with the defendant as a confinement" and that she[B-71] "was possessed, in view of their age difference, by a 'codependency syndrome'" from the incarcerated pilot "(acceptance of the person but rejection of his person)."[B-72][B-73][B-74]Subsequently, Mr. Noulis had referred to the night when the atrocious crime took place ( on 11-05-2021 and shortly after 00:00). As the prosecutor pointed out, the initial trigger for what followed was the verbal confrontation the couple had regarding the custody of their child. Characteristically, the prosecutor states: "After this particular umpteenth heated argument between the couple, the accused decided to proceed with the execution of a plan to eliminate his wife, which he had long been cultivating in his mind, in order to get rid of her presence and be left alone with their child. This plan consisted of two parts: on the one hand, the killing of Crouch and, on the other hand, making her death appear to be the result of a criminal act committed by unknown third parties in order to avoid his own criminal responsibility. And while the baby was sleeping in the living room of the house and Crouch was sleeping in the bedroom on the upper floor, the accused, using hand gloves, carried out a series of actions in order to create a virtual scene of 'robbery after murder' in the house. Specifically: a) proceeded to forcibly detach the surveillance camera of the living room - living room, which was placed (screwed) on the roof, so as not to record the movements of the support of the scenario he inspired, b) proceeded to remove and destroy the memory card of this device in order to make the visual material recorded on it disappear. c) he removed the window sash of the basement of the maisonette which he then concealed in the laundry room in order to create a "gateway" for the "unknown robbers" to enter the house d) he caused selected rooms of the maisonette (living room) to create an artificial image of clutter in order to display an image of their disorderly search (indicatively, disturbance of a library, throwing a plastic box of the board game monopoly on the floor) and removed from the living room area the couple's valuables (rings, rings) which he hid in a plastic bag in the tank of his motorbike in order to present them as 'prey of the attacking robbers'.[B-75][B-76][B-77]«Απόλυτα ψύχραιμος»[B-78][B-79]
[B-80]With regard to the [B-81]detained[B-82] [B-83]pilot[B-84], in his proposal Mr. Noulias stated that: "After completing the first part of the 'staging' of the ground floor countries of the house, the defendant at approximately 4:05 a.m. went up to the bedroom of the maisonette where his wife was sleeping unobserved. Completely calm, he surprised the victim, who was sleeping in a prone position (prone), and immobilized him with his superior body weight. With the force of his hands, he pressed Crouch's head firmly against the pillow, resulting in the blockage of the outer orifices of her airways (mouth and nostrils). This caused gradual difficulty in her breathing, she groaned and tried to react, but this was not possible. This attempt by the defendant to kill his wife lasted for five minutes and the victim finally died of suffocation at 4:11 a.m. This was because during the killing he was under intense physical and mental stress, his death being not instantaneous but agonizing."[B-85][B-86] The prosecution's motion, which was accepted by the jury, goes on to state, "After killing his wife, the ever-calm and self-controlled defendant proceeded immediately to carry out the second part of his criminal plan prepared from the beginning: The alleged invasion of his home by robbers, who killed his unfortunate wife. To this end he: a) at 4:20 a.m. he killed his pet dog named Roxy by hanging. The unfortunate animal was hung by him by its leash on the railings of the internal staircase between the ground and first floor. The commission of this crime was seen to be aimed both at making the scenario of the brutality of the "imaginary" robbers, who apart from his wife also killed the four-legged friend, appear more convincing, and at removing any suspicion from the defendant's person, since it would be unlikely that he himself would be seen to have abused the animal. b) He proceeded to selectively disturb the bedroom area as well, where he killed the victim, by removing and throwing a bedside drawer on the floor. This was done in order to form a picture of the investigation and the exact location of the crime. (c) moved the couple's sleeping baby on the ground floor and placed it on the bedroom bed, next to his mother, who had just been murdered by him. This was in order to add a further dramatic tone to the whole scenario and to magnify the ferocity of the non-existent robbers. d) Using string and duct tape, he tied his own hands together in front and his feet together, then did not tie himself to the bed boards on the bedroom floor. Further, he wrapped his neck with duct tape, with which he covered his mouth and eyes to make himself appear to be immobilized by the robbers. He did the same with the body of his wife, whose hands he tied elbow track with a grey cardigan, while around her neck he wrapped sweatpants in order to make the narrative of "bandit brutality" even more convincing. This was in order to give credence to his fabrication that during his attempt to contact the police authority he was indeed tied up."[B-87][B-88][B-88] Further, according to the prosecutor, the defendant insisted on engaging in hypocritical actions that would remove suspicions that he had committed the crime. As to the homicidal intent of the defendant, this was "clearly inferred" according to the prosecutor "from the manner and circumstances of the execution of the crime", namely the suffocating drowning of the victim for five minutes. Furthermore, according to the prosecutor, "the element of the calm mental state in which the perpetrator was in, as can be inferred from the advance method of shutting down the security cameras of his home, the surprise of the unsuspecting deceased, the staging of the allegedly committed robbery from the outset and the pre-planned efforts to mislead the prosecuting authorities".[B-89][B-90]Furthermore, in his motion, Mr. Noulis had deconstructed the claims of Bambi Anagnostopoulou, who has argued that Caroline's death was essentially an accident. The prosecutor had said that the full clarity of the defendant's case was "evident from the completeness of the relevant 'staging' both after and before the commission of the homicide, which demonstrates that he worked it out earlier and in a calculated manner and not under the state of uncontrollable impulse".[B-91][B-92]Finally, the prosecutor had pointed out that from the above evidence "absolute certainty is formed as to the intensity of the defendant's irrepressible temper and the cruelty and callousness of his personality." In all, 11 points are mentioned in the sentence that constitute the specific characteristics of his criminal acts. Among them, the prosecutor includes:[B-93][B-94]-"The cold-blooded and methodical exposition on the part of (the defendant) of a detailed false scenario of a raid on the crime scene by unidentified third-party bandits, who allegedly committed the crimes he committed, in order to mislead the police and law enforcement authorities.... From his hypocritical and unrepentant attitude after the homicide he committed as he sought psychological support to sustain his feigned grief over the loss of his wife. From his insolence and lack of remorse, as evidenced by his comfort in attending and participating as a 'martyr' in the religious ceremonies in memory of his wife who was killed by him, and by the cynicism and philanthropy he displayed even after confessing his actions as he attempted to justify the false robbery plot he pulled to avoid criminal responsibility as stemming from his interest in 'his daughter at least growing up with her father'. That is, for him to enjoy the fatherhood and upbringing of a child from whom he forcibly deprived from infancy his mother, shame this will not even be remembered."[B-95][B-96]Source: First Subject[B-97][B-97
[B-98]Contents of this article including associated images are belongs to [B-99]Cyprus Times[B-100]
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or [B-101]Cyprus Times[B-102][B-103]
[B-104]Source[B-105]
[B-2]Sentence issued for Sweet Waters crime He will be tried for two felonies and two misdemeanors[B-3]
[B-4][B-5]The [B-6]way[B-7]has opened[B-8] for the [B-9]referral[B-10] to [B-11]trial[B-12] of Bambi [B-13]Anagnostopoulos[B-14] at the Mixed Jury Court of Athens to stand trial for the brutal [B-15]murder[B-16] of his wife and mother of his child [B-17]Caroline[B-18] Krauts.[B-19][B-20]Specifically, in a [B-21]verdict[B-22] issued today by the Athens Plenary Council, the 33-year-old detained pilot [B-23]is[B-24]put on trial for [B-25]two[B-26] [B-27]felonies[B-28], [B-29]manslaughter[B-30] with [B-31]intent[B-32] committed[B-33] while in a calm mental state[B-34] and [B-35]abuse[B-36] [B-37]of an animal[B-38] and for [B-39]two misdemeanors[B-40], [B-41]false[B-42] [B-43]reporting[B-44] for making others suspicious of his actions and [B-45]making a false statement[B-46] repeatedly.[B-47][B-48]The [B-49]judges[B-50]-members of the judicial council [B-51]unanimously[B-52] adopted the "catapult" proposal submitted last November by prosecutor George Noulis. In his 24-page proposal [B-53]the prosecutor had described frame by frame[B-54] the scene of the savage crime staged by the accused in the [B-55]maisonette[B-56] of Sweet Waters.[B-57][B-58]According to the prosecution, the defendant [B-59]manipulated[B-60] and controlled the unfortunate [B-61]Caroline[B-62], going so far as to allow her to [B-63]use[B-64] [B-65]taxis[B-66] for her [B-67]transportation[B-68] belonging to a friend.[B-69][B-70]In his motion, the prosecutor, citing the testimony of a mental health counselor who visited the couple, stated that the young woman "experienced her relationship with the defendant as a confinement" and that she[B-71] "was possessed, in view of their age difference, by a 'codependency syndrome'" from the incarcerated pilot "(acceptance of the person but rejection of his person)."[B-72][B-73][B-74]Subsequently, Mr. Noulis had referred to the night when the atrocious crime took place ( on 11-05-2021 and shortly after 00:00). As the prosecutor pointed out, the initial trigger for what followed was the verbal confrontation the couple had regarding the custody of their child. Characteristically, the prosecutor states: "After this particular umpteenth heated argument between the couple, the accused decided to proceed with the execution of a plan to eliminate his wife, which he had long been cultivating in his mind, in order to get rid of her presence and be left alone with their child. This plan consisted of two parts: on the one hand, the killing of Crouch and, on the other hand, making her death appear to be the result of a criminal act committed by unknown third parties in order to avoid his own criminal responsibility. And while the baby was sleeping in the living room of the house and Crouch was sleeping in the bedroom on the upper floor, the accused, using hand gloves, carried out a series of actions in order to create a virtual scene of 'robbery after murder' in the house. Specifically: a) proceeded to forcibly detach the surveillance camera of the living room - living room, which was placed (screwed) on the roof, so as not to record the movements of the support of the scenario he inspired, b) proceeded to remove and destroy the memory card of this device in order to make the visual material recorded on it disappear. c) he removed the window sash of the basement of the maisonette which he then concealed in the laundry room in order to create a "gateway" for the "unknown robbers" to enter the house d) he caused selected rooms of the maisonette (living room) to create an artificial image of clutter in order to display an image of their disorderly search (indicatively, disturbance of a library, throwing a plastic box of the board game monopoly on the floor) and removed from the living room area the couple's valuables (rings, rings) which he hid in a plastic bag in the tank of his motorbike in order to present them as 'prey of the attacking robbers'.[B-75][B-76][B-77]«Απόλυτα ψύχραιμος»[B-78][B-79]
[B-80]With regard to the [B-81]detained[B-82] [B-83]pilot[B-84], in his proposal Mr. Noulias stated that: "After completing the first part of the 'staging' of the ground floor countries of the house, the defendant at approximately 4:05 a.m. went up to the bedroom of the maisonette where his wife was sleeping unobserved. Completely calm, he surprised the victim, who was sleeping in a prone position (prone), and immobilized him with his superior body weight. With the force of his hands, he pressed Crouch's head firmly against the pillow, resulting in the blockage of the outer orifices of her airways (mouth and nostrils). This caused gradual difficulty in her breathing, she groaned and tried to react, but this was not possible. This attempt by the defendant to kill his wife lasted for five minutes and the victim finally died of suffocation at 4:11 a.m. This was because during the killing he was under intense physical and mental stress, his death being not instantaneous but agonizing."[B-85][B-86] The prosecution's motion, which was accepted by the jury, goes on to state, "After killing his wife, the ever-calm and self-controlled defendant proceeded immediately to carry out the second part of his criminal plan prepared from the beginning: The alleged invasion of his home by robbers, who killed his unfortunate wife. To this end he: a) at 4:20 a.m. he killed his pet dog named Roxy by hanging. The unfortunate animal was hung by him by its leash on the railings of the internal staircase between the ground and first floor. The commission of this crime was seen to be aimed both at making the scenario of the brutality of the "imaginary" robbers, who apart from his wife also killed the four-legged friend, appear more convincing, and at removing any suspicion from the defendant's person, since it would be unlikely that he himself would be seen to have abused the animal. b) He proceeded to selectively disturb the bedroom area as well, where he killed the victim, by removing and throwing a bedside drawer on the floor. This was done in order to form a picture of the investigation and the exact location of the crime. (c) moved the couple's sleeping baby on the ground floor and placed it on the bedroom bed, next to his mother, who had just been murdered by him. This was in order to add a further dramatic tone to the whole scenario and to magnify the ferocity of the non-existent robbers. d) Using string and duct tape, he tied his own hands together in front and his feet together, then did not tie himself to the bed boards on the bedroom floor. Further, he wrapped his neck with duct tape, with which he covered his mouth and eyes to make himself appear to be immobilized by the robbers. He did the same with the body of his wife, whose hands he tied elbow track with a grey cardigan, while around her neck he wrapped sweatpants in order to make the narrative of "bandit brutality" even more convincing. This was in order to give credence to his fabrication that during his attempt to contact the police authority he was indeed tied up."[B-87][B-88][B-88] Further, according to the prosecutor, the defendant insisted on engaging in hypocritical actions that would remove suspicions that he had committed the crime. As to the homicidal intent of the defendant, this was "clearly inferred" according to the prosecutor "from the manner and circumstances of the execution of the crime", namely the suffocating drowning of the victim for five minutes. Furthermore, according to the prosecutor, "the element of the calm mental state in which the perpetrator was in, as can be inferred from the advance method of shutting down the security cameras of his home, the surprise of the unsuspecting deceased, the staging of the allegedly committed robbery from the outset and the pre-planned efforts to mislead the prosecuting authorities".[B-89][B-90]Furthermore, in his motion, Mr. Noulis had deconstructed the claims of Bambi Anagnostopoulou, who has argued that Caroline's death was essentially an accident. The prosecutor had said that the full clarity of the defendant's case was "evident from the completeness of the relevant 'staging' both after and before the commission of the homicide, which demonstrates that he worked it out earlier and in a calculated manner and not under the state of uncontrollable impulse".[B-91][B-92]Finally, the prosecutor had pointed out that from the above evidence "absolute certainty is formed as to the intensity of the defendant's irrepressible temper and the cruelty and callousness of his personality." In all, 11 points are mentioned in the sentence that constitute the specific characteristics of his criminal acts. Among them, the prosecutor includes:[B-93][B-94]-"The cold-blooded and methodical exposition on the part of (the defendant) of a detailed false scenario of a raid on the crime scene by unidentified third-party bandits, who allegedly committed the crimes he committed, in order to mislead the police and law enforcement authorities.... From his hypocritical and unrepentant attitude after the homicide he committed as he sought psychological support to sustain his feigned grief over the loss of his wife. From his insolence and lack of remorse, as evidenced by his comfort in attending and participating as a 'martyr' in the religious ceremonies in memory of his wife who was killed by him, and by the cynicism and philanthropy he displayed even after confessing his actions as he attempted to justify the false robbery plot he pulled to avoid criminal responsibility as stemming from his interest in 'his daughter at least growing up with her father'. That is, for him to enjoy the fatherhood and upbringing of a child from whom he forcibly deprived from infancy his mother, shame this will not even be remembered."[B-95][B-96]Source: First Subject[B-97][B-97
[B-98]Contents of this article including associated images are belongs to [B-99]Cyprus Times[B-100]
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or [B-101]Cyprus Times[B-102][B-103]
[B-104]Source[B-105]
