Editorial Focus
saved his life, yes, but it is ruined forever. Delay Gerard was a man healthy, young and hardworking, but since the fateful September 19, 2010, he became a paraplegic due to the bullet that fell into bone marrow a juvenile offender who entered the restaurant the French girl, for steal the money that may be in the box. His medical report indicates multiple and serious consequences as a result of sustained, but the heartless not be convicted of murder, because fortunately for him, the victim did not die, but Delay lost for the rest of his days normal life until then had.
Since the offender had not reached 18, he shall be punished either fully in accordance with the Penal Code, for the atrocity. Whether for severe injuries, which could mean 20 months to 8 years imprisonment as maximum or be construed as attempted murder, (which reduces the penalty for murder of a third to half) of 5 to 15 years penitentiary. Moreover, as the suspect was a minor at the time he left crippled Delay, the court will apply the Code for Children and Adolescents, which provides less severe criteria. As if this were not enough, in a year the robber, who was arrested by police in late October, will be of age and merit of the aforementioned Article 222 Code on Children and Adolescents, history, full of annotations (21 to date) accounting for multiple robberies (theft with violence) and takeover, will be destroyed and the young will be "clean." So to get back into court, after making a new outrage, surely serious, given his background, will be judged as if that was his first crime, without the aggravation of his criminal career.
This sad episode reminds us once again that the deputy project Lacalle Pou, presented several years, first under President Vázquez and then under current continues drawers because the left can not reach an agreement before a proposal full of meaning common, coming from the opposition. The same is assumed that the bundle of juvenile offenders does not disappear upon reaching adulthood, as today, and can be studied by the trial judge before sentencing, if deemed appropriate. The same happens with regard to other changes Penal Code imperative for our times, the decline in accountability. No sane person can deny that today existe, lamentablemente, un submundo de jóvenes que son un peligro público para la sociedad. Es evidente que ya no calzan en la categoría de menores y es infame que el tiempo se pase en discusiones estériles, dando así cabida a que suceda una tragedia como la mencionada, con responsables que no son sacados de circulación a pesar del riesgo que entrañan para la gente que trabaja y vive de acuerdo a la ley. Ni tampoco reciben un castigo acorde a la gravedad del hecho. Coyunturas semejantes han llevado a que sean muchos los países que han rebajado los estándares de otras épocas, para establecer un límite a la minoridad.
A su vez, para la víctima y sus familiares, a quienes among other penalties were also dropped a big economic problem difficult to solve, the time the person breadwinner of the family was not used, inadvertently becoming a generator of expenses, they must be disheartening to discover how helpless they are in their ability to claim to justice. Gives the impression that there is significant deviation of who deserves more guarantees, if the injured or the striker, to know the answers received through his counsel, against the order to assemble the steps preparatory to its application. First, in the court of third shift was prevented access to the file in which substance the criminal process and constant injuries, etc. to the point that they only learned he and the family, the offender nicknamed "Shorty", captured by police, was another escaped from Colonia Berro, as his accomplice. And what about the other camera. This time the Supreme Court, in its reply also refuses to provide the information requested by the defense, arguing among other things "that the child owns the information", which "prevents any activity from the raw data participation of children and adolescents duly assisted by counsel ... "
So it prevents something that is part of fundamental rights of any resident, as is the access to any information that legitimately have a right to know, just as much talk of defending human rights. Arguably too, which makes it a case of solidarity of the state against the citizen.
0 comments:
Post a Comment