Francisco J. Marks’ lawyers talk about “sloping floor” at trial – football

Final arraignments within the e-mails case proceed Thursday, Francisco J. Marx’s lawyer, Nuno Brandao, was the primary to take the ground, starting by reviewing the complete course of. University professors praised the urbanity of being current in court docket with the collective of judges, public prosecutors and lawyers for Benfica and Luis Filipe Vieira. Despite this, Nuno Brandao believes that the defendants entered an unequal combat, as they discovered themselves on a path that has already been lengthy with many choice makers connected to Benfica. “These defendants are in an comprehensible scenario. They are significantly deprived by the way in which these processes are performed in court docket. This course of has many penalties. There is one other course of, 5340, there was an ERC course of, there’s a course of. Civil course of. And I You should say that the terrain is a bit tough in a rustic with numerous supporters of assistants [Benfica e Vieira], the reality is that we’re blessed with this fortune. The decide within the civil case launched himself as a Benfica fan, a decide of the Court of Appeal, a Benfica fan and a Golden Eagle. Then the reporter of the ERC, additionally a Benfica supporter… it makes life tough for all of the defendants”, shot the lawyer, earlier than noting that the media can be extra within the supporters than the defendants: “The listening to of this case was symptomatic. Yesterday when the costs have been scheduled for the protection of the assistants, there have been many individuals, as we speak who’re identified to defend the defendants, we now have journalists right here, however they’re only a few. Media curiosity can be unbalanced and as of late it additionally impacts public opinion.” Before making Benfica, Rui Costa, Vieira, Soares de Oliveira, José Eduardo Moniz and Nuno Gaiso defendants and their potential guilt, Nuno Brandão issued a warning. : “These statements There are these that may age badly. One day we’ll attain the second when Benfica will likely be penalized in different instances, for details, prison, sporting penalties. These are statements that may age badly. The e-mails unfold numerous filth. There are many scandalous or morally objectionable details that might by no means have been identified with out the circulation of this electronic mail.”

Nuno Brandão then tried to dismiss the costs, denying that Benfica may complain, because the regulation solely refers back to the violation of privateness of people and to not the collective society. Furthermore, he defined why, opposite to what the regulation typifies, there was no violation of “telecommunications”: “For a long time it has been understood that correspondence constitutes a violation when it makes its approach. There isn’t any such factor, as a result of digital correspondence already exists. had reached the deal with.”

J. Marks’ lawyer careworn that there was certainly a public curiosity in disclosing the emails, even when it was to “embarrass” these chargeable for Benfica and cease “unlawful and inappropriate behaviour”. “Disclosure had the potential to cut back the danger of perpetuating inappropriate habits”, he careworn, then added that it was pure for the defendants to guard their very own pursuits.

“If we now have a membership behaving badly to win, it harms third events, opponents. The sufferer will defend the general public curiosity and at the identical time their very own curiosity, on this case the curiosity of their membership. If they instantly hand over the information to the authorities. Directed towards them I perceive Benfica’s concern about the success of the prison investigation carried out. In the e-Mole course of they tried to study about the method that investigated Benfica. But what they needed was for the emails. They have been buried. In any case, the chronology exhibits that these revelations led to the breach of Benfica’s pc system. No warning was given.”

Nuno Brandao recalled the criticism of assistant lawyers who realized that defendants wouldn’t repent. “Criminal proceedings are usually not used to cleanse sins. J. Marks revealed in court docket that he was satisfied that what he did was within the public curiosity. Does he not remorse it? But the court docket is just not an instance of cleaning souls”, he maintained.


Leave a Comment