This Friday (21), the Federal Supreme Court (STF) begins the trial of Deputy Carla Zambelli (PL) for the armed persecution of journalist Luan Araújo, which occurred in Sao Paulo, on the eve of the 2022 elections. The case became widely released after images of persecution circulate on social networks.
The incident took place on October 29, 2022, when Luan Araújo approached Zambelli in the neighborhood of Jardins, in São Paulo, shouting words of support to the then presidential candidate Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva (PT). During the interaction, the journalist provoked the deputy, who lost his balance and fell to the ground. After the episode, she and a security guard, both armed, chased the journalist for about 100 meters.
The chase only ceased when Araújo, after fleeing a block, entered a bar and was followed by the deputy, who, with the pistol in hand, forced him to lie down to the floor. In her defense, Zambelli said the journalist apologized and she let him leave without further consequences.
In the case, Zambelli is accused of illegal possession of a weapon and illegal embarrassment. The trial will take place in the Virtual Plenary of the Supreme Court and will extend until next Friday (28), with the opening scheduled for 11am today.
In August 2023, the ministers André Mendonça and Nunes Marques, appointed to the court by former President Jair Bolsonaro (PL), being the only ones to vote against the opening of the process. Mendonça argued that the case should be tried by the São Paulo court, while Nunes Marques argued that Zambelli acted legitimately to protect his honor.
The Attorney General’s Office (PGR) claimed that Zambelli abused the right to the possession of a gun by withdrawing the pistol inappropriately, outside the limits of self-defense, and thus committed the crimes of illegal possession of weapons and illegal embarrassment. If convicted, the deputy can take up to 5 years in prison: from 2 to 4 years for illegal possession of a weapon and from 3 months to 1 year for illegal embarrassment.
Zambelli, in turn, denies the accusations and argues that his reaction was legitimate in the face of Araújo’s provocations. It also argues that the use of the weapon does not qualify as illegal possession, as the size was regularized.
