On January 19, 2014, prosecutor João Alves de Araújo filed a complaint with the Igarassu Criminal Court () which narrates the following facts:
“On November 24, 2005, for futile reasons, the defendants Cleonildo José de Santana, aged 30, and Paulo Rogério Almeida de Brito, born March 2, 1988, age 25 [grifo nosso]took the life of 30-year-old Rosivaldo Batista.”
Paulo Rogério was 17 years old at the time of the crime. He turned 25 years old on the date of the complaint.
By law, he was unaccountable. Minors under 18 cannot be held criminally responsible. They are subject to socio-educational measures.
“No less than four prosecutors and six judges worked on the case and didn’t realize the obvious”, says lawyer Rodrigo Trindade.
“In processes involving poor people and without media coverage, unfortunately a good number of state agents do things half-heartedly”, says the lawyer.
The police investigation states that the victim was drinking with his brother when the accused “shot several firearms, including shots in the back”. They would have carried out the murder at the behest of another element.
According to the complaint, it is stated that “the victim and another named Adeilton were feared by residents and especially by traders, as they used to eat, drink and not pay their bills, in addition to extorting and threatening them”.
Last May, lawyers Rodrigo Trindade and Leandro Levi requested the termination of Paulo Rogério’s punishment “due to procedural madness”.
Judge Ana Cecília Toscano Vieira Pinto, from the Igarassu Criminal Court, recognized the absolute incompetence of the criminal justice system, since receiving the complaint, which contaminates all acts carried out.
The judge ordered the termination of the case in relation to the minor co-defendant and confirmed the prescription of the socio-educational claim. Paulo Rogério will not even be prosecuted, based
A summary of this episode was published on (June 23). Below are some reader reviews, at the request of the column.
The case reminded me of my first habeas corpus. She was an intern at Funap – Fundação Prof. Dr. Manoel Pedro Pimentel (manages social programs for prisoners and ex-prisoners).
The file stated that the patient was 18 years old. He said he was minor, but no one believed him. There was no document at Febem, at the Children and Youth Court. Finally, I managed to find the birth certificate with identity correction.
I kept the ruling in this case. We never forget the first HC! [Kenarik Boujikian, desembargadora aposentada]
If you enter the criminal sphere hard, I believe, you will hardly escape the quagmire, which the “geniuses” are looking for in a filthy copy of what they call “customary American criminal law” through the “plea bargain” institute and the “conviction by conciliation”, most often of blacks, Muslims, refugees, sex workers, but in the end all poor.
When the lawyer talks about “a process on the thighs” he could better refer to the treatment given to those favored by wealth, as those others are treated by contempt and inequality. [Caetano Lagrasta, desembargador aposentado]
It’s amazing that no defense attorney didn’t realize this either. Or even the defendant or his family. The age of majority information is known to the poor population. There is an “unwritten rule” in every office: check age and prescription. Nobody noticed anything. [juiz federal]
One question remains unanswered: what have the other actors in the process done in the case since January 19, 2014, especially the defenders who have officiated and the clerk of the Criminal Court? [advogado mineiro]
How many other cases like this are flourishing across Brazil? It seems like no one reads or does simple math. [procuradora da República aposentada]
I criticize the lawyer’s statement. Placed without counterpoint or reservation, it appears that it was endorsed, in the sense that poor people’s things are dealt with “on their own”.
Considering my 39 years of public service, I cannot agree. His vision makes very little of all the serious work done by everyone in the field of law. As stated in the article, it is unacceptable.
We see things wrong all the time. Things get fixed. Errors are avoided. It’s our job. [juiz estadual]
It is not the only case and the phenomenon is national. My priority concern is not to have a completed process with an exceeded deadline for decision or order, so that we do not run the risk reported.
The substantive logic of the system is not exactly universal and quality judicial provision. Career and power end up speaking louder. [juiz federal]
Incompetence has no geographical limits, it goes from South to North, including our Pernambuco. [professor universitário]
Absurd! [Juíza estadual]
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
