Buenos Aires, November 18, 2025 (NA) – The Supreme Court of Justice upheld the three-year and eight-month prison sentence imposed on Luciano Napolitano, son of the late musician Norberto 'Pappo' Napolitano, for assault, threats, and gender-based violence against his former partner in various episodes that occurred in 2020 and 2021 in the Buenos Aires locality of Benavídez.
The most serious incident occurred on May 24, 2021, when the musician grabbed her by the neck and squeezed until it was difficult for her to breathe while threatening her, a situation that ultimately led to the criminal complaint.
Napolitano had been initially convicted in a summary trial before the Correctional Court 4 of San Isidro for minor injuries aggravated by the relationship and gender-based violence, threats, illegal deprivation of liberty aggravated, and possession of a war weapon.
The highest court, with the signatures of Horacio Rosatti, Carlos Rosenkrantz, and Ricardo Lorenzetti, rejected a complaint appeal filed by the defense for failing to meet the formal requirements established by agreed resolution 4/2007, and thus left firm the previous ruling of the Buenos Aires Supreme Court that had reinstated the sentence handed down in the first instance.
According to the file accessed by the Argentine News Agency, on November 21, 2020, Napolitano assaulted and threatened his then-partner, Mariel Oleiro, after harassing and humiliating her, wielding a .38 caliber firearm.
He served a year and a half in detention between prison and house arrest, until the San Isidro Guarantees Chamber acquitted him in December 2023, considering that the necessary degree of certainty had not been reached to uphold the conviction.
That decision was appealed by the Public Prosecutor's Office and the plaintiff, and in December 2024, the Buenos Aires Supreme Court overturned the acquittal by noting that the Chamber had made a 'fragmentary and isolated' analysis of the evidence, selecting only those elements that supported the version favorable to the accused without evaluating the material gathered in the case comprehensively.
The plaintiff sought to bring the case before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation to reverse that decision, but the court declared the filing inadmissible, which left firm the conviction that had been handed down in the first instance.
