In the spring of 1929, the newspapers of the Capital reported extensively on one of the most scandalous and mysterious trials of the interwar era. A woman famous in Bucharest’s high society, known for her beauty and elegance, was accused of having killed her lover who was 14 years younger. The story seemed taken from a dramatic novel: a broken marriage, a passionate relationship, jealousy, money and a crime committed in the middle of the night. The protagonist was Arabella Armășescu, a refined noblewoman and the former wife of the lawyer Constantin Stravolca, a well-known name in Bucharest’s legal world. The man for whom she had left her husband, the young Nicolae Urseanu, would be found dead only a few days after the woman’s official divorce. The question that disturbed public opinion was simple and dramatic: was it a suicide or a cold-blooded murder?

Bucharest’s high society and a dangerously scandalous love

In the 1920s, Bucharest was a city full of contrasts, where the luxury of the aristocracy and the social life of the elite coexisted with social tensions and public scandals. In this elegant setting, the Stravolca family was well known. The house of the lawyer Constantin Stravolca had become a true salon of the capital’s elite, where lavish parties, balls and gatherings of influential people were organized.

Arabella Armășescu was considered one of the most beautiful women of the time. Elegant, cultured and extremely seductive, she attracted attention wherever she appeared. Prosecutors would later describe her, in an almost literary style, as a woman “perfectly armed for conquest”, capable of easily attracting the admiration of the men around her.

Her destiny, however, was to change at the moment when Nicolae Urseanu entered her life, a young lawyer only 28 years old. He had been hired as a secretary-lawyer in the office of Constantin Stravolca himself. In this way, Urseanu came to know the wife of his employer.

The young man came from a modest family and, according to the prosecutors, struggled hard to build a career during a difficult economic period. 

The official documents of the investigation described him as a persevering man who was facing “times that seemed entirely against him” in his attempt to find a stable place in the profession. Meeting Arabella was going to radically change his destiny.

An adulterous relationship that destroys a marriage

The relationship between Arabella and Nicolae Urseanu quickly turned into a passionate affair. For the conservative society of interwar Bucharest, such a relationship was a scandal in itself, especially when it involved the wife of a respected lawyer and one of his employees.

Eventually, Constantin Stravolca found out about the affair between the two. His reaction was immediate: he dismissed the young lawyer at once and tried to save his marriage. Arabella, however, had no intention of giving up her relationship with Urseanu. More than that, she asked for a divorce.

The separation between the two spouses turned into a complex financial negotiation. In the end, an agreement was reached: Constantin Stravolca accepted to offer his former wife the huge sum of two million lei, with certain conditions.

The lawyer wanted to have control over the way the money would be spent, reserving for himself the right to verify its use. For Arabella, the conditions were restrictive, but accepting the agreement allowed her to begin a new life alongside her lover.

In this context, the woman rented a room on Precupeții Noi Street no. 25, where she frequently met Nicolae Urseanu. That room was going to become the scene of the tragedy.

The night of the crime on Precupeții Noi Street

On the evening of March 21, 1929, Arabella Armășescu went to Nicolae Urseanu’s home to show him a copy of the transaction document she had signed with her former husband. The document confirmed that the divorce had been finalized and that she was to receive the promised money.

The young man’s reaction, however, was not the one she expected. Urseanu showed himself deeply dissatisfied with the conditions of the financial agreement. The control that the former husband kept over the money seemed humiliating and unacceptable to him. The discussion between the two lovers quickly degenerated into a heated argument.

After the initial altercation, they left together for the rented room on Precupeții Noi Street. There, the conflict continued for hours. The dispute lasted until late at night.

Around five in the morning, the silence of the street was broken by two gunshots. The owner of the building, awakened by the noise, hurried to the tenants’ room.

What she discovered inside was a dramatic scene. Nicolae Urseanu was lying dead in bed, with a bullet in his temple. Arabella Armășescu was wounded in the chest, but still alive.

Two completely different versions of the tragedy

Immediately after the tragedy, Arabella Armășescu offered a simple explanation for what had happened. According to her statement, Nicolae Urseanu had shot her during an argument and then committed suicide.

The prosecutors, however, were not convinced by this version. The investigation revealed several suspicious elements. First of all, the woman’s wound was superficial, which raised questions about the way it had been caused. 

Also, the prosecutors discovered on Arabella’s left hand a round burn mark, specific to the use of a firearm. This observation fueled the hypothesis that the woman herself had fired the revolver.

According to the theory of the prosecution, Arabella Armășescu had killed her lover while he was sleeping. The weapon had supposedly been hidden under the pillow, being kept there as a means of defense.

The prosecutors argued that the woman had fired with her left hand in order to remain in the same position in bed and not wake Urseanu. After that, she would have fired a superficial shot into her own body in order to create the appearance of an attack followed by suicide.

In the official report, the hypothesis of suicide was categorically rejected. An important argument was the fact that the victim had been found covered with the blanket. The investigation maintained that a person who dies instantly from a gunshot to the head could not have covered himself alone.

Moreover, the bullet had been fired into the left temple, while Nicolae Urseanu was right-handed. All these details led the Prosecutor’s Office of the Bucharest Court of Appeal to charge Arabella Armășescu with “intentional homicide”.

The trial that captivated public opinion

The case quickly became one of the most watched trials in interwar Romania. The press reported daily on the evolution of the investigation, and Bucharest society was fascinated by the story of the beautiful woman accused of murder.

Before the trial, Arabella Armășescu spent three months in Văcărești prison. Her release was granted only after the payment of an impressive bail of 200,000 lei. Surprisingly for many, the bail was paid by her former husband, Constantin Stravolca.

He did not stop there. The lawyer hired for the defense of his former wife some of the most famous names of the Bucharest bar: Istrate Micescu, Radu Rosetti, Ion Periețeanu, Jean Th. Florescu and Ion Vasilescu-Valjan.

During interrogations, Arabella initially presented a version of events that did not match the evidence discovered by investigators. She insisted that she had been shot by Urseanu and that he had later committed suicide.

After the prosecutors pointed out that her statements were contradictory, the woman adopted another strategy: she began to say that she no longer remembered exactly what had happened that night.

Mina Minovici’s expertise and the duel between prosecution and defense

The most important witness for the prosecution was the famous forensic doctor Mina Minovici, who had performed the autopsy of Nicolae Urseanu and had investigated the scene of the tragedy.

Minovici declared that the suicide hypothesis was extremely unlikely. He emphasized that if the victim had shot himself, the weapon should have fallen from his hand, not been found placed on the bedside table.

In addition, the doctor insisted on the impossibility that a person who had just shot himself in the head could still have the strength to pull the blanket over his body. His arguments seemed decisive.

However, the defense adopted an emotional and spectacular strategy. The lawyers tried to completely change the jury’s perception of the victim. In their pleadings, Nicolae Urseanu was presented as a sentimental adventurer who had taken advantage of the naivety and wealth of Arabella Armășescu in order to obtain money.

Moreover, the lawyers suggested that someone else might have committed the crime. The name of another lover of Urseanu, Ecaterina Pavlov, was even invoked as a possible suspect.

The dean of the Bucharest Bar, Jean Th. Florescu, testified in favor of Arabella, stating that the entire case was based more on assumptions than on solid evidence.

Meanwhile, several witnesses changed their statements. The owner of the house where the tragedy had taken place stated that she did not believe Arabella was capable of committing a crime. The servant who had initially said that the woman was left-handed later declared that she used both hands. Gradually, public opinion began to turn in favor of the accused.

The verdict and a tragic epilogue

After a trial intensely followed by the entire country, the jury delivered the final verdict: Arabella Armășescu was innocent. The decision stirred contradictory reactions. For some, the verdict confirmed that the investigation had been built on assumptions and prejudices. For others, it was proof of the influence that a wealthy and well-connected woman could have in the society of that era.

Arabella’s life, however, did not become calm after the trial. Shortly after the scandal ended, she reconciled with her former husband, Constantin Stravolca. The relationship between the two seemed to have survived a tragedy and a sensational trial.

Destiny, however, had prepared another dramatic episode. In 1940, Constantin Stravolca was killed out of jealousy by a rival. Thus, the story that had begun with a mysterious crime would end, a decade later, with another tragedy.

The case of Arabella Armășescu remains to this day one of the most fascinating judicial episodes in the history of interwar Bucharest, a disturbing combination of passion, ambition, money and mystery.

We also recommend: The Scandal of Interwar Bucharest: What Ion Barbu and George Călinescu Had to Settle