Judge Alan Ide Ribeiro da Silva, from the 2nd court of Augustinópolis/TO, ended the testimony of a witness after the defendant opened a bottle of beer during the hearing. In the case in question, the woman was tried for committing the crimes of threat and racial insult.
In the recording it is possible to see the moment in which the woman opened a bottle of beer during one of the witnesses’ testimony. Outraged, the magistrate expelled her from the virtual courtroom and sentenced the defendant to a fine of ten minimum wages for disrespecting the Judiciary.
“Doctors, doctors. Here’s the thing, doctors. I see that the defendant just opened a beer. It’s recorded here. Doctors, I’m not going to interrogate a person who is drinking in an act, which is a serious act of trial. So I’m not going to interrogate her and I’m going to order her to be excluded.”
At sentencing, the judge acquitted the woman of the crime of insult due to lack of evidence, but sentenced her to three months and two days in detention for the crime of threat. Furthermore, he convicted her of bad faith litigation due to her conduct during the hearing.
“Given the behavior of the defendant during the instruction, who in turn opened a bottle of beer and started drinking its contents, I CONDEMN HER for litigation in bad faith […] given their risky (reckless) behavior in the procedural act. In compliance with the provisions of art. 81, §2º, of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the face of such disrespectful behavior, the sentence is set at 10 minimum wages.“
Check out the moment:
frameborder=”0″ allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share” allowfullscreen>
In a statement, the Tocantins Public Defender’s Office stated that “DPE/TO does not comment on court decisions involving trials of assisted people. In the case in question, it is important to inform that it is not up to the Institution to comment or give an opinion on the behavior of the person assisted during the virtual hearing.“.
The TJ/TO highlighted that “The criminal hearing involved the procedural investigation of an accusation made by the Public Prosecutor’s Office against the defendant for committing the crimes of threat and racial insult. During interviews with victims and witnesses, the defendant was caught opening an alcoholic drink and starting to drink it.
At this moment, the presiding magistrate of the act, given the situation caught, ordered the immediate exclusion of the defendant from the virtual room, as well as declaring the impossibility of carrying out her interrogation in that condition.
The Public Defender’s Office, at the opportune moment, decided to waive the interrogation of the defendant. Oral arguments were presented by the prosecution and defense, at which point the case was concluded for trial.
The sentence was handed down on the same day, with the requests being judged partially valid to only convict the defendant of the crime of threat. Subsequently, the defendant was convicted of bad faith litigation for having behaved in that way during the hearing, and had to pay a fine of 10 minimum wages.“.
