THE jury in the Sacco murder trial will retire to consider its verdict today after the judge finishes summing up the evidence.
In closing speeches yesterday, the prosecution claimed Ms Anna Maria Sacco was a participant in her husband's murder, while the defence claimed there was no evidence to support the allegations made against her by the teenage girl who shot Mr Sacco.
Ms Sacco (22), of Ravensdale Park, Kimmage, denies she murdered her husband Franco (29) at their home in Coolamber Park, Templeogue, on March 20th, 1997.
The prosecution alleges the teenage girl, already convicted of the murder, shot Mr Sacco at the behest of his wife. Yesterday, the defence chose not to call evidence and the trial went into its final stages. On behalf of the prosecution, Mr Roger Sweetman told the jury the question they had to decide was whether the shooting of Franco Sacco was "the sole act" of the teenage girl "or was Anna Maria Sacco a participant in it?"
He said the jury had the girl's evidence that she volunteered to kill Mr Sacco and that his wife's response was to give her a hug.
They also had her evidence that when she went upstairs to kill him and "her nerve failed", Ms Sacco's response was, "We'll do it in the morning".
There was further evidence from the girl that the next day, the defendant came to her bedroom door and asked if she was ready to do what they had agreed the night before, Mr Sweetman submitted.
He said the jury should also consider the "extensive clean-up operation" that followed the murder. It was "incredible" that the girl could have wrapped up the body, moved it, and attempted to clean up the scene alone.
"Is it possible that the then 15year-old girl, having shot Franco Sacco, could have carried out all of that on her own?", he asked. Inconsistencies in the girl's evidence were "perfectly rational" given her age and consequent "mental immaturity" and the "trauma" of the events.
Inviting the jury to superimpose "the seeding of the story of sexual abuse in her mind by the accused and her family with the actual trauma of the killing", he said it was "perfectly reasonable" that her mind was not clear.
She had nothing to gain from giving evidence against her former friend Ms Sacco, he said.
In his closing speech before the jury and Mr Justice Smith, Mr Barry White SC, defending, said there was nothing but the girl's evidence to support the State's case. There was no evidence to corroborate her claims. He congratulated Mr Sweetman on his endeavours to present the teenage girl who was "the cornerstone" of the prosecution case as a "sweet, innocent 15-year-old lacking in mental maturity". But there were "striking difficulties" with their case, he said.
He put it to the jury that the girl was "a drug abuser" who tried to play down her use of heroin, ecstasy, speed and cannabis, "a shoplifter" and "a thief" who tried to make little of the theft of around £2,000 from a neighbour.
The "varying accounts" given by her of the killing were designed to minimise her role, he said.
Mr White said he decided not to call Ms Sacco to give evidence because he felt it would only distract the jury from their task of deciding whether the prosecution had proved its case.
He also invited them to consider whether the detailed and graphic allegations of sexual abuse made by the girl on the night of the killing could be made "unless they were true".
He suggested the only reason the girl showed emotion when read the statement containing those allegations was "she was telling the truth".
When it came to her evidence of the "actual slaying of Franco Sacco" the girl showed no emotion, Mr White said. He asked the jury if her evidence did not strike them as having been "learned off pat".
There was nothing to support the allegation that Ms Sacco helped clean the scene after the killing.
There was no evidence to corroborate the claim that Ms Sacco and members of her family concocted a story of sexual abuse by Franco Sacco and told the girl to tell that to gardai hours before she did so.
And Mr White asked why there was no plan made to dispose of the body if, as the State alleged, Ms Sacco had "put the girl up to killing him".
The jury had only the girl's allegation that she volunteered to kill Mr Sacco.
Her evidence was "trotted out" as if "learnt by rote". When asked about inconsistencies in it she "ran to the refuge of `I don't remember' ", he claimed.
And cross-examined about the truth of events, she had replied: "There's only me that knows". "Why would she and she alone know other than that she was the sole person responsible?" Mr White asked.
He also put it to the jury that the evidence of the Tallaght barman, Mr Peter Gifford, with whom Ms Sacco had an affair, did not corroborate the State's case. There was also no evidence of a request to find a killer around the time of the murder, he said.
And would anyone who was "seriously planning" a murder ask a man with no criminal or subversive connections and no record to find someone to do it, he asked.
