Emanuel cites breach of custody and asks TJ not to admit evidence about alleged fraud in the Covid-19 vaccination queue :: Legal News

Mayor Emanuel Pinheiro (MDB) asked the Court of Justice not to admit the evidence obtained during Operation Capistrum, specifically that which identified alleged fraud in the Covid-19 vaccination queue. Pinheiro’s lawyers presented their preliminary defense to Judge Gilberto Giraldelli, the case’s rapporteur, alleging that there was a break in the chain of custody of the evidence collected during the investigation.

read more

Emanuel identifies son and former deputy in report on alleged fraud in Covid vaccination and asks for action to be sent to the STF

The State Public Ministry points out that Emanuel Pinheiro (mayor of Cuiab), Gilmar de Souza Cardoso (former deputy secretary of Health Management), Antnio Monreal Neto (former chief of staff at City Hall) and Marco Polo de Freitas Pinheiro (brother of Emanuel), joined forces with the purpose of defrauding the Covid-19 vaccination queue.

The possible crimes would have occurred at the Municipal Health Department of Cuiab. Using municipal public services improperly, the group that would be led by Emanuel would have inserted false data into the department’s information system with the purpose of giving priority to certain people for registering for the vaccine.

The facts were evidenced within the scope of the operation, which removed Emanuel from city hall in 2021, for an alleged scheme of “cabitura” of health jobs and undue payments of the “Prmio Sade”, in exchange for political support.

Referring to item 5.1 of Technical Report No. 005/2022 of the police investigation carried out jointly by the civil police and the Public Ministry, entitled “Vaccination”, Pinheiro’s defense claims that there was a break in the chain of custody of the evidence collected, which would result in the invalidating them.

The argument is that the probative element that culminated in the initiation of the investigation that gave rise to the criminal judgment that judged Pinheiro is not reliable, since the Public Prosecutor’s Office did not demonstrate how the data obtained through the seizure of the mayor’s cell phones was extracted.

According to the defense, the technical reports did not explain how the data from Pinheiro’s cell phones was extracted. This procedure, carried out by criminalistics institutes, must follow the appropriate steps until the goods are returned to the police or judiciary.

“However, there is no evidence in the records (at least documentary) that these steps and, consequently, the preservation of the chain of custody of the evidence, have been verified”, maintained the defenders, adding that there is no information about who promoted the extraction, which method was used to do so, on which date, nor whether it was possible to transfer the entire content to the hard drive attached to the process.

“It is necessary to highlight that the lack of reporting and chronological documentation about each stage of the evidentiary collection raises serious doubts about its own viability, as the possibility of contamination or adulteration of possible data cannot be ruled out”, he pointed out.

In view of this, Pinheiro asked, in preliminary defense, that judge Gilberto Giraldelli not admit the evidence obtained, as the chain of custody would have been disrespected by the investigation.