The defense of Maicol Antônio Sales dos Santos the only accused trapped by the young woman’s death Vitória Regina de Sousa In Cajamar, Greater São Paulo, he filed a request for annulment of the complaint made by the São Paulo Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPSP) against him. The request has not yet been considered by the judge of the case.
THE MP denounced Maicol for femicide and three other crimes .
The defense not only disputes the complaint but also seeks the annulment of crucial evidence and the rejection of the accusation. The defense document points to several preliminary issues that, according to the lawyers, invalidate elements of the investigation and the complaint itself.
Understand: Accused can be sentenced to more than 45 years in prison
One of the central points of the request for annulment of Maicol’s defense is the nullity of its interrogation . Lawyers claim that They were not notified to follow the accused’s testimony. In addition, they argue that interrogation occurred during the night, ending after midnight, which would configure abuse of authority and make the act null and void unless there was consent assisted by the prisoner.
Coercion allegation
The defense maintains that Maicol was coerced to confess The crime, being forced to “invent a story” under pressure and threats of involvement of his mother and wife.
In a later voice recording, Maicol would have reported that he was placed in a “dirty” and “rotten” bathroom for not wanting to cooperate. He states that the police authority threatened to harm the accused and say that his family helped clean the crime scene, forcing him to invent the story to protect his family members. The defense suggests that police station cameras can prove this situation.
Other arguments raised by the defense to contest the validity of the confession include the supposed Lack of the “Miranda Warning”, which in Brazilian law is not typified, but it is about informing the right to silence which, by itself, would already annul the act.
The defense also claims that the delegate and others present in the interrogation would have influenced the testimony, suggesting what Maicol should say. Criticism is made to the audiovisual recording of interrogation, which would have been cut out in 17 parts and edited, without Maicol being initially warned that he was being recorded.
Given these alleged irregularities, the defense calls for recognition of the illegality of interrogation. Based on “Poisoned tree fruits theory” and request that both interrogation and all elements derived from it – such as the indictment of Maicol, the Discainment Report and the Simulated Reproduction Report, made based on the “defendant’s confession” – are considered inadmissible and removed from the case file.
Early denunciation and incomplete investigation
Another argument of the defense is the “Precocity of the denunciation” . They claim that the complaint was filed before the investigation was complete and lacks “just cause”, based on a “immature, incomplete” probative set.
The defense criticizes the investigation because it is supposed to have been based on subjectivisms and “selective leaks by those who should, first and foremost, ensure confidentiality.” THE victory family also expressed concern about leaks of information in the case.
Crucial points of the investigation would be pending or not attached to the file in time for a complete analysis, preventing an effective defense. As an example, the defense cites the lack of expert report for the photos found on Maicol’s cell phone.
The fact that the Public Prosecution Service itself requested new steps and the opening of a new survey to investigate others’ participation in the defense’s view, reinforces the idea that the complaint was premature. Skill already found unidentified male genetic material In Maicol’s car, indicating the possible presence of a third person in the vehicle.
What is known about 3rd person who would be at the crime scene
The defense claims that the premature complaint violated the procedural relationship, not allowing the accusation to be challenged in all its aspects. They point out that extremely relevant informative elements, such as the report of the simulated reproduction of the facts, were attached only 48 hours before the deadline for the response to the prosecution, making it difficult to exercise the right of defense.
For these reasons, the defense asks for rejection of the complaint for the lack of just cause.
Contradictions
The defense also argues that the complaint is inept . They claim that the accusatory piece has “excellent technicity”, with “contradiction and narrative inaccuracy of the facts.” According to the defense, the description of the crime is superficial, without clarifying the path of the accused.
An “irresoluble contradiction” is pointed out by the defense in the description of the crime of concealment of the corpse. Initially, the complaint indicates that concealment occurred between February 27 and March 5. However, in another stretch, he states that Maicol hid the body “immediately after the episode Death”, transporting it in the trunk of the car with a shovel and a hoe. This change in the version within the complaint itself configures, for defense, absolute ineptitude for contradiction.
The defense concludes that it is impossible to defend itself with such abstract and contradictory allegations, which violates the principles of the right of defense and due process of law. They thus require the rejection of the complaint for ineptitude.
The request must be considered by the judge of the case.
This content was originally published in case Vitória: Defense of the accused calls for annulment of MPSP complaint on the CNN Brazil website.
Source: CNN Brasil
I’m James Harper, a highly experienced and accomplished news writer for World Stock Market. I have been writing in the Politics section of the website for over five years, providing readers with up-to-date and insightful information about current events in politics. My work is widely read and respected by many industry professionals as well as laymen.
