12/08/2010 - 21h00
Court excludes witnesses in trial on Gol plane crash
JOÃO PAULO GONDIM
In SÃO PAULO
The Federal Court of Mato Grosso excluded seven witnesses from the trial on the crash of the Gol Boeing in Mato Grosso in 2006, in which 154 people died.
The hearing of six of these witnesses had been asked by the defense of the American pilots of the Legacy jet, Joseph Lepore and Jan Paladino, which hit the Gol aircraft, causing the accident.
According to the Federal prosecutors' office, responsible for the accusation, the decision will accelerate by a year the winding up of the case. The defendants may receive sentences of four years for manslaughter (homicide without intent).
Judge Fábio Henrique Rodrigues de Moraes Fiorenza, in a decision last Tuesday, also determined that the trials relative to the pilots and the air traffic controllers in the case be unified. He also accepted a request of an expert examination made by the controllers.
Federal Prosecutor Analícia Trindade, of Sinop (MT), foresees that, now, the trial can be defined in six months.
"The decision was excellent. The trial could be frozen with those infinite witnesses called from overseas and who would not in any way contribute to explaining the cause and the responsibilities."
The witnesses considered dispensable by the magistrate were passengers on the Legacy (for lack of technical knowledge) and aviation specialists (for not having witnessed the episode).
All live overseas. For the Prosecutors' Office, calling them would slow the trial.
The first witnesses will be heard on August 25. Sought today by the Folha, the pilots' lawyer, Theo Dias, did not return the call. In 2009, he denied that calling the pilots would cause the crimes to prescribe.
The Air Force, which represents the controllers, said that it will not comment "matters which are in the judicial sphere."
RODRIGO VARGAS collaborated, from Cuiabá
In view of everything set forth, I decide the following:
a) Determine that the files of case no. 2009.36.03.002962-5 be joined to those of this case for joint trial and judgment;
b) I deny the request for the production of witnesses by the defense;
c) I determine that Robert Perterka be heard, a witness called by the prosecution in case no. 2009.36.03.002962-5, in a hearing to take place at this court on 25/08/2010, as 14:00;
d) I determine the issuance of a precatory letter to hear the evidence of the witness called by the prosecution - in case 2009.36.03.002962-5 - Jorge Kersul Filho;
e) I deny the naming as expert witnesses of the people listed by the accused and determine that a letter be sent to the Air Force Command and to the University of Brasilia - UNB so that, in the space of ten days, they say whether among the professionals they employ, there are any who have knowledge of the air traffic control system in Brazil who can in a hearing supply the necessary clarifications in respect of it. Issue the necessary [orders]. Annex a copy of this decision to the files of both cases. Notify [the parties]. Police inquiry number: 670/2006.
REVOLVIDOS C/ DECISAO OUTROS (ESPECIFICAR) ...EM FACE DE TODO O EXPOSTO, DECIDO O SEGUINTE: A) DETERMINAR QUE OS AUTOS Nº 2009.36.03.002962-5 SEJAM REUNIDOS A ESTE PARA TRÂMITE E JULGAMENTO CONJUNTO; B) INDEFERIR O PEDIDO DE PRODUÇÃO DE PROVAS TESTEMUNHAIS PELA DEFESA; C) DETERMINAR A OITIVA DE ROBERTO PETERKA, TESTEMUNHA ARROLADA PELA ACUSAÇÃO NOS AUTOS Nº 2009.36.03.002962-5, EM AUDIÊNCIA A SER REALIZADA NA SEDE DESTE JUÍZO EM 25/08/2010, ÀS 14H; D) DETERMINAR A EXPEDIÇÃO DE CARTA PRECATÓRIA PARA A OITIVA DA TESTEMUNHA ARROLADA PELA ACUSAÇÃO - NOS AUTOS Nº 2009.36.03.002962-5 - JORGE KERSUL FILHO; E) INDEFERIR A NOMEAÇÃO COMO PERITOS DAS PESSOAS ARROLADAS PELOS RÉUS E DETERMINAR A EXPEDIÇÃO DE OFÍCIO AO COMANDO DA AERONÁUTICA E À UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASÍLIA - UNB PARA QUE, NO PRAZO DE DEZ DIAS, DIGAM SE HÁ ENTRE SEUS QUADROS PROFISSIONAL QUE TENHA CONHECIMENTOS SOBRE O SISTEMA DE CONTROLE DE TRÁFEGO AÉREO NO BRASIL PARA QUE EM AUDIÊNCIA POSSAM PRESTAR ESCLARECIMENTOS A RESPEITO. EXPEÇA-SE O NECESSÁRIO. JUNTE-SE CÓPIA DESTA DECISÃO EM AMBOS OS AUTOS. INTIMEM-SE. Nº do Inquerito: 670/2006