Federal judge Eduardo Appio, from the 18th Court of Curitiba, who arrived in , is the target of investigation on suspicion of stealing bottles of champagne from a supermarket in the city of Blumenau (SC) on Wednesday (22).
Wanted by SheetAppio stated: “I cannot [me manifestar] because I don’t know anything. I’m getting informed.”
The TRF-4 (Federal Regional Court of the 4th Region) only informed that it received a notification from the Civil Police against a federal judge this Thursday (23) and that “the appropriate measures will be taken”.
Authorities linked to the state’s Civil Police told the Sheet this Friday (24) that there are images from security cameras at the location recording the theft.
The TRF-4 says that the case will be processed confidentially. In situations like this, the court usually opens a PAD (disciplinary administrative proceeding) against the judge.
Appio worked at the 13th Court of Curitiba, which became known as , from February to May 2023.
Openly critical of the methods of the operation launched in 2014 and the actions of the authorities who gained notoriety during the investigation – such as the former judge and the former prosecutor –, Appio signed controversial decisions and became the target of a request for suspicion proposed by the Federal Public Ministry.
Among other things, the MPF highlighted Appio’s links with PT leaders. Until the beginning of 2023, Appio used the login “LUL2022” to access the Federal Justice system.
But the episode that led to Appio’s removal from the 13th Federal Court was a call to lawyer João Eduardo Barreto Malucelli, partner of former judge Sergio Moro (now senator) in a law firm and son of federal judge Marcelo Malucelli, then Lava Jato rapporteur in the second instance.
During the call, Appio pretended to be someone else, in an attempt to prove that he was speaking to Marcelo Malucelli’s son.
Publicly, Appio denied having made the call, which was recorded by João Eduardo. He only admitted it in September 2024, during a , when he also explained that his objective was to prove that Malucelli would not have the necessary exemption to act in cases involving lawyer Rodrigo Tacla Duran, due to the bond between his son, João Eduardo, and Moro.
“[A ligação] it was to understand [João Eduardo] Was it a son or nephew? [de Marcelo Malucelli]. If he were a nephew, there wouldn’t be any problem. Being a son, serious problems and signs of . Because Malucelli was taking jurisdiction over the processes that directly affected Sergio Moro’s interests. Tacla Duran has always been Moro’s arch-enemy. So, how could he have jurisdiction and, at the same time, his son be a partner of Moro?”, stated Appio, at the time.
The episode generated disciplinary administrative proceedings against Appio at the TRF-4 Internal Affairs Office. The magistrate, however, managed to transfer the case for analysis by the CNJ (National Council of Justice) Internal Affairs.
