Schweizer († 50) drowned ex-wife in 2014
“Bathtub killer” dies before trial in Zurich
An appeal process at the Zurich High Court must be discontinued. The accused murderer has died. The IT consultant killed his ex-wife in 2014.
Published: 16 minutes ago
|
Updated: 4 minutes ago
The alleged murderer should have explained himself before the Zurich High Court. (archive image)
A 50-year-old Swiss man who was convicted of murdering his wife in the first instance died before the appeals process at the Zurich High Court. The procedure is therefore discontinued.
For the Supreme Court, the death of the alleged murderer is an “insurmountable procedural obstacle” that prevents a verdict from being reached, as the Supreme Court writes in its recently published decision. It also decided that the deceased or his heirs would not receive two million francs in compensation and satisfaction from the state.
The “Bathtub Murder”
The first-instance convicted murderer, who was suffering from cancer, had demanded this amount in return for the trial and his prison stay. He had never made a confession. These were all “accidents,” he said in each case.
The case made headlines as a “bathtub murder”. The Swiss was sentenced to life imprisonment in May 2021 by the district court in Miles for attempted and completed murder. In 2014, he poured hot water on his handicapped wife, who he divorced, in the tub and then drowned.
Hit victim by car
According to the indictment, the man himself was responsible for the disability. In 2012 he is said to have tried to kill his wife for the first time while on vacation in Mallorca. Apparently because she wanted to separate from him and take their child with her.
According to the indictment, he beat her up, ran her over with his car and then left her badly injured and with no memory of the incident. Since then she has needed help.
Insurance sparked murder investigation
She was cared for by her now ex-husband, of all people, who systematically isolated her, prevented Spitex and therapy treatments and, according to the judgment of the district court in Meilen, finally killed her.
At first, only the insurance company noticed that these were not “accidents”. She became suspicious because, after the woman’s death, the man immediately demanded half a million Swiss francs in life insurance. The insurance company commissioned an expert opinion, which ultimately triggered the murder investigation. (SDA)