Once more, the courtroom doors opened for Adele Sorella, a mother twice accused and twice convicted of murdering her young daughters, as she faced her third trial this Wednesday.
Sorella’s previous convictions for the crime were nullified twice by the Court of Appeal. The disquieting details of her late ex-husband, a known felon with connections to underworld crime whose life was snuffed out within prison walls, added layers of complexity to the case.
Fourteen years have passed since the gruesome discovery of eight-year-old Sabrina and nine-year-old Amanda De Vito in the family home in Duvernay, Laval. Official cause of their untimely deaths was never established. Nevertheless, the prosecution contended that the young girls likely took their last breath in a hyperbaric chamber purposed for juvenile arthritis treatment.
Sorella was originally found guilty of first-degree murder, but this verdict was overturned due to a legal technicality by the Quebec Court of Appeal. Consequently, she stood trial once more, this time being deemed guilty of second-degree murder. Nonetheless, yet another appeal by her defence led the Court of Appeal to mandate a fresh trial.
In present day, a decade and four years since the tragedy, the prosecution reiterated its case, now before a solo judge instead of a jury. Crown prosecutor Marie-Claude Bourassa maintained the belief that Sorella, being the only person with both motive and means, was responsible for the death of her daughters. The prosecution further argued that Sorella, battling depression, had meticulously planned these harrowing acts, possibly in a bout of despair. Interestingly, the mental health argument had previously been dismissed.
However, the defence continues to suggest that the culprit might be hiding among late ex-husband’s enemies. They were specifically pointing towards Giuseppe De Vito, a convicted drug dealer. However, their attempt to present this case was thwarted in the preceding trial.
The focus of the third trial is limited to a single element. This agreement led both prosecution and defence to condone that they won’t need the same witnesses to reiterate their previous statements.
“Navigating this trial with a sole judge necessitates a comprehensive approach. We must plead both the legal questions and the evidence previously presented,” as noted by the Crown.
While no new visits to the witness stand are anticipated, both sides project at least a six-week timeline to present their cases before the judge.
