The two killed the woman’s grandfather in 2013. However, the murder only came to light long after their victim had been buried. At the initial trial the woman said that she and her husband had killed her grandfather as they were at the end of their tether.
The grandfather was said to have been a tyrant and she and her husband had had their fill of his insults and put downs. It was the granddaughter’s husband that came up with the plan to mix ecstasy in to his pudding in order to kill the pensioner.
The victim’s son-in-law was also a suspect. However, he died during the cause of the investigation.
In its verdict the Appeals’ Court said “The victim was unsuspectedly condemned to a certain death when his granddaughter gave him the pudding. The accuse didn’t act in the slightest way on impulse. They waited until the time was right and acted in a clinical and aloof way. They then gave the impression that the victim had died a natural death. This was not carried out in an amateur fashion as they claimed”.
The Appeals’ Court said that grandfather’s alleged tyrannical behaviour could was of no relevance.
“Even if he had a tyrannical and insufferable character, he still should not have been murdered in such a cowardly way. The victim’s murder is completely socially unacceptable”.
The Appeals’ Court overturned both the sentence given to the granddaughter of the victim and her husband. It was decided that they should serve 18 years each. Nevertheless, they were allowed to leave the court. They will be called up to start their prison sentences sometime in the near future.