RJ court denies habeas corpus, and goalkeeper Bruno remains at large

Player had his conditional release revoked after attending a Flamengo night game and traveling to Acre

Reproduction/Instagram/@oficialorionfc
RJ court denies habeas corpus, and goalkeeper Bruno remains at large

The First Criminal Chamber of Justice in Rio de Janeiro denied the habeas corpus request made by goalkeeper Bruno’s defense. With the decision, the player remains considered a fugitive more than two weeks ago.

The arrest warrant was issued after the Rio de Janeiro court overturn parole of the athlete. The measure was taken because Bruno broke rules e restrictive measures imposed by the Judiciary. Among the violations, the goalkeeper attended a Flamengo night gamefor the State Championship, without prior authorization, and took a trip to Acreexceeding the permitted territorial limits.

With the revocation of the benefit, the determination is that Bruno return to semi-open regime. As the player has not yet been located, the Disque Denúncia service, in partnership with the security forces, has published photos and posters to ask the public for help with information leading to his whereabouts. The goalkeeper’s defense reported that he will only appear in court after exhausting all possible resources in the Judiciary.

Wanted poster for former goalkeeper Bruno

Wanted poster for former goalkeeper Bruno

Bruno Fernandes was sentenced to 22 years in prison for the death of his ex-girlfriend, model Eliza Samudio. Over the last few years, the player has gone through regime progression until reaching conditional releasewhich has now been suspended due to the infractions committed.

Loss of parole

The Criminal Execution Court of Rio de Janeiro revoked on the last day 5th goalkeeper Bruno’s parole benefit. The body of the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro (TJRJ) issued a warrant for the arrest of the former athletein the semi-open regime, valid for 16 years.

The Court’s decision was after Bruno’s trip to Acre, on February 15, without authorization of the Criminal Execution Court. “The convict’s conduct must be seen as negligence in fulfilling the benefit granted to him”, said judge Rafael Estrela Nóbrega.

source