The rapporteur Walter de Almeida Guilherme stated that “unfounded request for reduction of the percentage of loss redeemed to legal minimum”.
In addition to the loss of the redeemed, “the question of the interruption of lapses for benefits will be reviewed in due course,” said the judge of first instance.
L.D.L. the denied being the owner of the cell phone and said that he was assigned ownership of the phone just by having looked for the Quick Intervention Group police, soon after this questioning of the prisoners who would be the cell phone seized.
“In spite of the negative” said the rapporteur, “one cannot despise what they said the prison staff, behold, nothing points that have the intention of harming the aggravating that, according to stated, assumed ownership of the mobile device”. Walter William pointed out that “these testimonials are able, therefore, to support the decision to recognize the lack of serious disciplinary”.
“In view of the above, deny the application further,” he said.
Participated in the decision, which was taken unanimously, the judges j. Martins e Grassi Neto.
Case # 0186221-77.2012.8.26.0000