THE CORUMBIARA CASE

RECOURSE IN STRICT SENSE - REASONS OF THE DEFENSE - [concept] [full]

The denounced defendants, unconvinced with the respectable sentence of pronouncement, petitioned the present recourse, alleging:

1. Cícero Pereira Leite Neto and Claudenir Gilberto Ramos:

The accused were charged with qualified homicide, art. 121, § 2nd, IV, jointly with article 29 of the Penal Code, 12 times, as well as for the following infractions: corporal lesion, disobedience and resistance, illegal constraint, illegal prison , finally, gang and illegal possession of weapons.
At the end of the criminal instruction, in final allegations, the Public Ministry, without any probatory juridical presumption that demonstrates the existence of sufficient indications of responsibility, it sustains and charges the defendants, in relation to the connected crimes of disobedience, illegal prison, gangs and, also, to what is referred to as qualified homicide.
The proof of the records disallows the charges to the appellants.

2. Vitório Regis Mena Mendes:

The objective of the defense is to establish the understanding that the accused:

a - although accused of ten qualified homicides, they did not commit them, be it so by action or by omission;

b - that the respectable sentence of the charges, in virtue of the truth, even if partial, withdrew six of those imputations against Vitório Régis Mena Mendes;

c - to make it clear that the same reasons for the withdrawal of the charges for most of the victims, whose deaths were attributed to him, the minor number of imputations must benefit from the same truth as the majority withdrawal and for the same reasons;

d - to make it evident, that the loss of the life of the minor, Vanessa Santos Silva, killed by a frontal shot to the umbilical area while she was returning to the leaseholders’ camp would not have been caused by a military projectile, as is related in the expertise investigation, nor by means of any action or omission on behalf of Vitório Regis Mena Mendes;

e - to establish categorically that the leader, Sérgio Rodrigues Gomes, for whose death multiple responsibility had been attributed to the leaseholders, invaders, farmers and the military force by the Public Ministry, was not the defendant's responsibility because of physical or psychological approach, nor even by any type of omissions.

3. Claudenilson Alves, Luiz Carlos de Almeida, Daniel da Silva Furtado, José Emílio da Silva Evangelista, Vilson Luiz Pedon, Airton Ramos de Morais and Moises de Oliveira Lima:

The lack of proof with plausible direction for indictment, without any existing signs of participation, by action or omission, the minimum that they may have been; and finally, that the facts and the testimonial proofs produced in the instruction, on both sides, accusation and defense, signal toward the in-existence of adequate evidence to prove responsibility.

Despite of the insensitivity of the deaths, their consummation did not take effect by means of the defendants and such deaths occurred independently of their will.
The defendants were present to execute a valid, opportune and efficacious judicial order.

4. José Ventura Pereira:

He reiterates negative authorship, in view of the proofs that were gathered during the instruction, the testimonial and documentary proofs as well as those of the specialized investigations are strongly favorable to the innocence of the accused, who as the Commandant-in- Chief of the operation, was necessarily in the rearguard and before the commencement of the operation he had given explicit and severe orders in relation to conduct.
The defendant did not collaborate with the supposed atrocities; he didn't witness the excesses; there is no concrete and direct proof concerning his participation in the event.
There was no subjective intention on behalf of the defendant in participating, favoring, allowing, consenting to, collaborating or inciting his subordinates to promote supposed homicides, shooting dominated and subjugated people and thus, those homicides were beyond his will.

5. Geraldo João Rodrigues:

During the instruction it was forthrightly demonstrated that the incident was a lamentable and imprudent accident, which more resembled a charge of light corporal lesion, for which the blame, characterized imprudence, is admitted as a mere supposition. As such there was no subjective intention - will - of the defendant in shooting the victim to kill him/her, thus it is impossible to persist in the character of qualified homicide as was attempted.
Obviously, in conclusion, all the appellants plead for the reformation of the sentence, or in maintaining it, that the remittance of the lawsuit be made to the distinguished Tribunal of Justice so that it may appreciate the reasons for the resource, withdrawing the charges from the appellants in the homicide crimes, as well as in the related delict.