Apart from the defendant, former President Jair Bolsonaro, General Walter Braga Netto arrived at the trial of the coup plot at the Supreme Court (Supreme Court) as the most injured accused of the crucial core of the case.
According to the complaint of the PGR (Attorney General of the Republic), Braga Netto “acted incisively to ensure the success of the coup contract, coordinating the most violent actions of the criminal organization and captaining initiatives to pressure the Army’s high command.”
The main accusations are that he would have articulated, at a meeting at his home with members of the Army Special Forces, a plan to monitor Minister Alexandre de Moraes and to arrest or kill him; delivered in kind money to finance actions of the coup; and stimulated/centralized attacks against commanders who opposed the initiative.
Faced with such a thorny scenario, Braga Netto’s defense led by lawyer José Luis Oliveira Lima sought to disqualify the main elements presented against the general and, at the same time, approach the STF ministers, taking off the image of his client from Bolsonarism.
Oliveira Lima tried to be manageous and seductive in the face, providing solidarity with the Supreme Court, and in particular to the rapporteur Minister Alexandre de Moraes, for the attacks that both have been suffering from pockets.
Later, he qualified the actions of January 8 of “Criminal Acts” and used a repeated expression to exhaustion by Moraes: “No one can think this is a walk in the park, as the eminent rapporteur said. Evidently not. [Mas] I have an obligation to say that Braga Netto has nothing to do with that. “
And he put into practice the old tactic that, in adverse scenarios, the best defense can be the attack. In a hard and striking tone, who contrasted with the warm and flattened average of the eve of the day before, the lawyer criticized the defense curtailment, saying that he only had full access to the file two days before the process instruction, and that the material was so caudalious that his team took more than 30 days to open everything.
Oliveira Lima then passed Aeo Delast, Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid. He said that throughout the process, Cid presented seven different versions with the objective of involving Braga Netto in the coup plot and thus ensuring the benefits of the denunciation, but that the PGR did not gather evidence to corroborate them.
He complained that the whistleblower was coerced by the PF to include untruths to his statement. The proof of this, he said, would be Cid’s delay to tell that Braga Netto would have delivered money to finance scammer actions – 15 months after signing the denunciation agreement. “It’s a scandal!” The lawyer complained.
The outraged tone marked the speech of Oliveira Lima, who resorted to terms as a lie, liar and irresponsible (about ICD), defined the denunciation as farce and powder and said that the support of the PGR was “a speech” lacking evidence.
Only next week will we know if the defense strategy had any effect. Oliveira Lima recalled that Braga Netto has “40 years of services rendered to the country” and that, 69, if convicted, will spend the rest of his days in prison.
The general has been detained since December 2024 in a barracks in Rio de Janeiro, on the grounds that to interfere with investigations.
Braga Netto is, among the four generals in the Bank of the defendants, which enjoys the least support among their peers, especially those of active. Even before being denounced, he fell on a disgrace at the army summit by the content of the messages released in the investigation, in which, with profanity, incites colleagues publicly rocket the commanders Freire Gomes (Army) and Baptista Jr (Aeronautics).
Oliveira Lima also sought to disqualify the prints of these messages, stating that they were tampered with and that the case law of the STJ has defined that such reproductions are not valid as evidence.
And only mentioned laterally an important episode, when Braga Netto told supporters after the electoral defeat: “Don’t lose faith. It’s just what I can say now.” According to the defender, the video was attached by the whistleblower as if he had been recorded at the camp in front of the Army HQ, but in fact it was in the palace of Alvorada. It just didn’t go into the merits of what the customer said – the most relevant.
