JF and JE, husband and wife, were both convicted of aggravated human trafficking and facilitating illegal entry. JF was also convicted of drug related offences.
The couple, in collaboration with organised criminal groups operating transnationally, were involved in the recruitment, transportation and harbouring of two Nigerian girls (victim1 and victim2), one of whom was a minor, in order to employ them in the Italian prostitution market and profit from them financially. The victims’ journey from Nigeria to Italy involved the crossing of Niger and Libya and was organised and paid for by the defendants. The fee for transportation ranged from 15.000,00 to 25.000,00 euros, which the girls had to pay back through their work. The victims were repeatedly subjected to physical violence at the hands of both defendants and were constantly threatened. Before leaving Nigeria, the victims were forced to undergo a voodoo ritual. This meant they believed that if they were to escape, not repay their debt or talk to the police they would be killed, or their families would be harmed. The defendants had different roles within the criminal activity.
JE took care of the recruitment of the girls, the voodoo rituals, the organisation of transport to Italy and payment to the criminal groups. She also acted as a ‘madame’, teaching the girls how to solicit customers and how much they should charge the clients. She was responsible for deflowering victim 1 with a banana and threatened the families of the victims after the police raided the house where they were staying and took them to secure accommodation.
JF took care of arranging transportation of the victims to Catania and personally pick up the victims and took them to the house he shared with his wife. He was also in charge of the ‘bookkeeping’ and annotating the respective amounts received by the girls. Based on the testimony of both victims , the evidence collected through phone call surveillance and wiretapping of the prison meetings between JF and his wife, the claims of the defendants, who argued they only rented a room to the girls and knew nothing about their prostitution, were deemed to be false. On 7.10.2019 they were both convicted to 10 years imprisonment and immediate expulsion from Italy upon completion of the sentence.
尼日利亚
尼日尔
利比亚意大利Article 110, 81 paragraph, 601 subsection 1, 602 ter c. 1 letter a), b) and c) penal code and 4 L.146/06
Article 110, 81 paragraph, 601 subsection 1, 602 ter c. 1 letter a), b) and c) of penal code and 4 L.146/06
Article 81 paragraph and 110 penal code and article12, subsections 3 letter b) and 3-ter letter a) e b), Legislative decree 25 July 1998 e article 4 L. 146/06
|
Facilitating illegal immigration
Both defendants, in complicity with other unidentified individuals residing in Libya and Nigeria, with the aim profiting by their actions, encouraged, financed, organised and implemented the illegal entry of victim 2 in Italy taking advantage of the transportation, residence and embarkation services provided by traffickers in Libya. Aggravating factors were exposure to life threatening situations given the conditions of the boats used for transport and their high risk of sinking; acting with the aim of recruiting victims to sexually exploiting them; contribution to the commission of an offence carried out by an organised criminal group operating transnationally. |
Article 110, 81 penal code and 73 Legislative decree 309/90
|
Transport and supply of narcotic substances
Defendant 1, JF, was charged with this offence on the basis that together with others, he took part in the transportation and supply of narcotic substances, specifically cocaine. |
Please see above
Tribunale di Catania (N.1081/2019)
JE, the wife, was four years older than her husband and was a principal defendant. She was also a prostitute, but she had stopped working due to her pregnancy. On the facts there is no mention of her being a victim of trafficking.
Based on the evidence JE, was particularly aggressive towards the victims and more prone to anger and violence than her male companion.
It is also worth noting that whilst sentencing, general mitigating circumstances invoked by the defence team were rejected on the basis that the actions of the defendants were particularly despicable and characterised by complete disregard towards the victims. Furthermore, by presenting unreasonable versions of the facts, the defendants demonstrated their complete lack of remorse.