The defense tried to debunk the Islamist motive of the Manor stabber: “She’s a mythomaniac.”
“His Islamic faith is frankly non-existent. He does not know the Koran, he does not pray, he does not go to mosques, he does not wear the veil, he ate pork, he prostituted himself “. So the defense lawyers Daniele Iuliucci and Simone Creazzo tried to dismantle the alleged Islamist motive of the stabbing of the Manor. “Defining this terrorism is disrespectful to those who really saw terrorism in the face,” he added.
According to Daniele Iuliucci, the case was created by the Federal Police, who on the evening of November 24th published on Twitter the news that the defendant, then 28, had already been investigated for issues related to jihad. This caused a media bomb to explode and also pushed the cantonal authorities, according to Iuliucci, to improvised statements: “They seemed almost proud to have our terrorist too,” explained Iuliucci. According to the defense, however, there was nothing Islamic.
Both the declarations of the victim and the witnesses, the defense explained, do not give a glimpse of a terrorist act. “But as Isis, we are in Switzerland”, a Manor saleswoman would have replied to the woman shortly after the events, explained the lawyer Iuliucci. “No one has fled, the testimonies show. None of those present were concerned about the Islamic State or terrorism ”.
When she arrived at the Manor, the defendant asked a saleswoman for a knife. “She asked for a bread knife, not knowing that it is not the most suitable for what she would like to do, because she wants us to cut bread. Something broke in that fragile mind ”, Iuliucci continued. According to the defense thesis, there is nothing terrorist in the woman’s gestures, except that she would like to be seen as such: a worse fundamentalist terrorist. In fact, only after discovering the contents of the psychiatric report, she would have started pretending to practice Islam, Iuliucci said.
On the day of the stabbing, to all those who spoke to her, the woman confided her fears: “She is only very afraid, the first time I saw her she told me: Here they think I’m crazy, but I don’t I’m crazy”. Madness which, on the other hand, everyone agrees. Even the defense lawyers have called her: “Liar, delusional and mythomaniac”. The woman was already under drug therapy before the act and according to the lawyer, more than the Islamist motive, to blame for her actions would be the interruption of the drugs. The toxicological analyzes, explained the defense, do not show the intake of the drugs in the last weeks before the attack.CopyAMP code.
“There are no traces of contact between my client and any terrorist.” According to the lawyer Daniele Iuliucci, neither of the two men with whom the defendant had relations would be a true jihadist. “One of the two was more interested in receiving nude photos and has always replied that he is not a terrorist and that he does not feel sympathy for the Islamic State in response to some images that praised him sent by the defendant”. Furthermore, the second, the one the woman fell in love with, according to the defense does not exist. Because there would be no evidence in the records of a man’s response to the messages that the woman sent him. She “he Wrote to an inactive Facebook account”. Despite the lack of answers, the woman still claims to have had an affair with him and she used the man’s name for each of her passwords. “He is a ghost, a figment of his imagination,” said Iuliucci.
The woman, it was discovered from the defensive plea, also admitted to having prepared with accomplices in the attacks in New York and Rome, attacks that never took place. “They are part of her game to be the great terrorist,” said Iuliucci, “but in New York she should have sat in a church while others would have blown up the church, she wouldn’t have even worn the jacket.”
According to the defense, then, the defendant did not shout the phrase Allah U Akbar during the attack, there is no evidence of it in the testimonies. Only the stabber and the victim say so. According to Iuliucci, the victim’s memory was distorted by the thesis spread by the media and the authorities. Those of the accused, on the other hand, would be ravings. The phrases praising the Islamic State and Muhammad, then, would have been pronounced later “when it had already calmed down, but not in the heart of the attack”.