Judge who kept teenager 15 years trapped in male cell in Para is punishedThe teenager was arrested for 26 days in a male cell with about 30 men, in Abaetetuba and was raped countless times.
The National Council of Justice (CNJ) He decided to punish administratively the judge who maintained a teenager 15 years jail for 26 days in a male cell with about 30 men and sexually abused, in Abaetetuba, inside the Para, in 2007. The magistrate received penalty availability, that prohibits it from exercising its functions, It may be called to act after at least two years.
no day 7 November 2007, the magistrate Clarice Maria de Andrade received a Para police office, requesting transfer “on an urgent basis” teen, trapped in the city police station.
The justification was that the girl ran “risk of suffering any type of violence by the other”.
Second or CNJ, the judge would only order the teenager's transfer to another prison unit on 20, in a letter sent to the Para Justice of Internal Affairs. In his defense, the magistrate said he delegated to a server the task of communicating the case to the Magistrate still on 7. The justification would have been denied by officials and expertise on the server computer, says the CNJ.
In his opinion, the rapporteur of the administrative process, Arnaldo Hossepian, He claimed to be “permissible” the judge has delegated the statement to his subordinate and, after, accepted the “justifications, she said, They were presented by the server to delay compliance”, which occurred more than ten days later. “Evident, therefore, the lack of magistrate's commitment to its functional obligations”, said. The vote was followed by most of the plenary.
In 2010, CNJ had already decided the compulsory retirement of Judge, more or Federal Supreme Court (STF) annulled the decision two years later. “According to the STF ministers, there was no evidence that Clarice Maria de Andrade was aware of the circumstances in which was fulfilled the teenager's arrest warrant”, says the CNJ. “on the occasion, the Supreme determined that the CNJ examine the case again.”