Costa may withdraw from plea bargain.
The former director of Petrobras, arrested in Operation Lava Jato, had decided last Friday to accept a plea bargain in which he would tell everything he knows in exchange for a lighter sentence; his new lawyer, a specialist in the matter, now states that nothing is yet defined; "We will evaluate the best line of defense and there is no plea bargain proposal," said Beatriz Catta Preta; lawyer Marcio Thomaz Bastos, former Minister of Justice, was hired by a pool of construction companies led by Camargo Corrêa to try to get Costa to withdraw his plea bargain.
247 - Four days after announcing his decision to accept a plea bargain – where the prisoner reveals everything he knows, sometimes even providing evidence, to lead to the conviction and imprisonment of others – former Petrobras director Paulo Roberto Costa, arrested in Operation Lava Jato, may change his mind.
The information suggests that former Justice Minister Marcio Thomaz Bastos has been hired as a lawyer by a pool of construction companies, led by Camargo Corrêa, to try to persuade Costa to back down from his decision. If he accepts the deal, the former Petrobras director will expose the state-owned company's relationship with several other companies.
Costa's new lawyer, a specialist in plea bargaining, now says that no agreement has yet been defined. "This is a very personal decision for the defendant and nothing has been defined. We will evaluate the best line of defense and there is no proposed agreement," said Beatriz Catta Preta.
"If he opts for a plea bargain, Costa will have to negotiate the terms of the agreement with the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office, which will assess what relevant information he can provide in exchange for mitigating circumstances to his status as a defendant," he added.
The decision announced on Friday led the current lawyer in the case, Nélio Machado, to threaten to leave the case, as he opposes the agreement. He believes that Paulo Roberto Costa did not commit any crime and therefore disagrees with the terms of the agreement.