It has been a month of trial with 18 sessions, statements from the accused, witnesses and police and civil guards who participated in the investigation. All to try to shed light on the murder of the United Left councilor in Llanes in 2018, Javier Ardines. The popular jury has been meeting since last Monday and its decision is now known.

Its members consider that the main defendants are guilty of the acts charged against them. In the case of Maamar Kelii and Djilali Benatia, they are believed guilty of having murdered the mayor in Belmonte de Pría. Regarding Pedro Nieva, husband of the woman who had a parallel relationship with Ardines, they see him as an inducer while Jesús Muguruza is indicated as an intermediary.

With the jury’s verdict already known, now it is necessary to know the magistrate’s decision. Jury that has also opposed the possibility of granting clemency to any of the four in case of being convicted. The Prosecutor’s Office and the private prosecution request 25 years in prison for each of them.

Proven facts

The deceased -Javier Ardines- had a relationship with the wife of one of the accused, Pedro Nieva, who was also his wife’s second cousin. It was a relationship with more than 30 years and it was developed in Llanes, where Ardines lived and where Nieva traveled especially during vacation periods since the family residence was in the Basque Country. The two maintained this relationship covertly and outside of their respective marriages. The spokesperson for the popular jury has pointed out that “the first relevant fact verified occurred in 2017 when Pedro Nieva voluntarily recorded a conversation between his wife Katia and the late Francisco Javier Ardines.”

After the recording, the defendant, in order to control his wife and fearing that she would have some other sexual encounter with the deceased, visited online stores selling covert video surveillance objects, microphones, vehicle surveillance devices and tracking devices for vehicles.

In July 2018, the defendant, in the face of the approaching summer season and knowing that his wife would spend the summer in a family home close to the victim’s, made the decision to end the life of Ardines. To do this, he contacted the also accused Jesús Muguruza, whom he asked to find people who could carry out the facts. Thus, Muguruza raised the order to the third defendant Maamar Kelii, who, after a meeting in which an agreement was reached on the price to be paid, decided to act jointly with a fourth defendant Djilali Benatia.

Thus, on July 27, the defendants Nieva, Muguruza and Helii, traveled to Belmonte to give the third defendant the necessary instructions to finish off Javier Ardines. The defendant Nieva had exhaustive knowledge both of the area where the events would take place and of the victim’s customs.

Thus, in the early morning of August 16, around four thirty in the morning, with enough time to prepare a better ambush, the defendants Kelii and Benatia arrived at Belmonte and placed two more fences on the same road (transversely) ( the first, on day 1, was still there). They did it in a way that prevented the passage of any vehicle, to make sure not to fail and increase the time available to board Javier Ardines.

In addition, to have more guarantees of success and nullify the possibility of defending the victim, each of the defendants carried a bottle of pepper spray, the defendant Nieva a stick and the defendant Muguruza, a baseball bat. They then hid by a wall and waited. Around 6 in the morning Ardines left his house in his van and, when he reached the point where the fences were placed, he stopped the march and got out of the vehicle to move them away. He left the engine running, the lights on, and the driver’s door open.

At that moment, defendants Kelii and Benatia suddenly came out of hiding and sprayed Javier Ardines with pepper spray. The victim took off running, pursued by the defendants. He was hit by being hit on the head with either the stick or the bat. He fell to the ground on his knees and then on his stomach. He was also strangled from behind by one of the two defendants, in any case, agreed.