He complained about threatening to kill him, then attacking him and hitting him with kicks and punches. According to the allegations, he had to hand over more than 10,000 euros, money in turn tied to unemployment benefits. During the hearing, however, the defense raised several inconsistencies in its account. The Court of Nocera Inferiore acquitted three people, Pascual Avalon, Alfonso Manzilla, and Salvatore Pecoraro, of the crime of attempted extortion.
The facts range from 2013 to 2014. For the three, there was also an aggravating circumstance of behaving mafia-style. The prosecution demanded 7 years imprisonment. The investigation began after the complaint of the victim, Noser, who said he was first threatened with phone calls and threatening letters, and then physically assaulted. According to the indictment, the 45-year-old – the aggrieved party in the proceedings – obtained unemployment after “fictitious employment (with the payment of relevant contributions) by the sole owner” of Avalon, one of the three defendants. However, for this unemployment benefit, the three would have demanded a payment of €10,000. The amount the victim refused to pay. On November 26, 2014, according to investigations, the three attacked Nocerino in the entrance hall of his house, with kicks, punches and slaps. Raid to force him to cash out. One of the three was also armed. The victim had a bruised face with a broken nose, scratches on the chest and hematoma, as well as various bruises on the legs and fingers of one hand. All were judged curable, according to a medical report, within 25 days. Investigation documents also mentioned that at least two of the three defendants attempted to run over the victim with a car, also at that time. Seeing the man’s resistance to not giving up, the three decided to punish him.
Instead, the defense – attorneys Andrea Fagetto, Silvio Calabrese and Bonaventura Carrara – showed many inconsistencies in the merchant’s story, compared to what he had announced to the police during the investigation phase. We’ll have to wait for the court’s reasons to understand the judges’ reasoning. According to the defense team’s objections, the man modified his account several times, denied and then confirmed, for example, that he knew one of the defendants. Then he denied that he was aware of his employment by that company, contrary to the elements that indicated an agreement between the latter and the owner to divide the unemployment. Which was no more than the money demanded by one of the accused. Moreover, thanks to handwriting experience, it was established that the threatening letter sent to the victim was written by the same aggressor. The judges decided to acquit and drop the accusation hypothesis.
“Internet trailblazer. Travelaholic. Passionate social media evangelist. Tv advocate.”