WILKES-BARRE — Luzerne County prosecutors and attorneys for homicide suspect Natanihel Sanmartin agree on one issue: Sanmartin did indeed fatally shoot his girlfriend Carla Pina.
But they strongly differ on the reason.
Assistant district attorneys Carly A. Levandoski, Anthony G. Cardone and Gerry Scott and attorneys Max C. Lubin and John B. Pike made their last pitch in their closing arguments Thursday morning to the Luzerne County jury that began deliberating Sanmartin’s fate on an open count of criminal homicide and charges of child endangerment and reckless endangerment.
Sanmartin faced a three day trial before Judge David W. Lupas.
Wilkes-Barre police detectives charged Sanmartin, 42, with fatally shooting Pina inside their residence at 42 Darling St. on Feb. 12, 2023.
Sanmartin claimed the shooting was an accident while prosecutors argued it was intentional with malice.
“Natanihel loved Carla,” Lubin said in his closing argument. “You heard the evidence, he purchased Carla gifts for Valentine’s Day. This was a tragic accident.”
Lubin pointed to police body camera footage at the scene that captured Sanmartin screaming, crying and begging officers to save Pina. The body camera footage showed Sanmartin remained at the scene and did not flee as a guilty gunman would, Lubin noted.
Holding the 9mm handgun in his hand, Lubin asked the jury if someone had intent to kill, the gunman would aim directly at the target.
In his illustration with the handgun, Lubin reminded the jury the trajectory of the bullet was downward into Pina, who was shot in her mouth.
Lubin also noted Sanmartin was under the influence of alcohol, cocaine and marijuana at the time of the shooting.
Levandoski during her closing argument said Sanmartin became angered when he felt Pina’s friend, Melba Gonzalez, had disrespected him about his “performance as a man.”
Sanmartin, Pina, Gonzalez and Jose Reyes were drinking Hennessey at the kitchen table when Sanmartin, Levandoski said, became angered at what they were saying about him.
Levandoski said Sanmartin had multiple choices to leave the house or go to sleep.
Instead, Levandoski said, Sanmartin chose to go into a bedroom, remove the 9mm handgun from its holster and fire a warning shot that prompted Pina to check on a sleeping grandchild.
When Pina entered the bedroom, Sanmartin shot her in the face, Levandoski told the jury.
“We proved this case fact-by-fact, witness-by-witness,” Levandoski said. “The evidence doesn’t fit the scenario by the defendant that he jumped back and the gun accidentally fired.”
Levandoski said a ballistics firearm expert testified that the 9mm handgun could not be fired by accident.
The post Specific intent or an accident? Jury deliberates Wilkes-Barre fatal shooting appeared first on Times Leader.