Defendant questions harsher sentence than Valério in AP 470

From Conjur - The defense of Simone Reis de Vasconcelos, convicted in Criminal Action 470, the mensalão (monthly allowance) case, filed a Motion for Clarification with the Supreme Federal Court questioning the length of the sentence imposed, considering it disproportionate to the sentences imposed on the defendants considered leaders of the scheme.

Simone was convicted of conspiracy, active corruption, money laundering, and tax evasion. The former director of SMP&B, who was part of the so-called advertising or operational core of the mensalão scandal, received a sentence of 12 years, seven months, and 20 days, and a fine of R$ 374,4.

The defense, represented by lawyers Leonardo Isaac Yarochewsky and Thalita da Silva Coelho, argues that Simone was repeatedly considered merely a member of the scheme and that, therefore, her participation did not have the same relevance as those who actually possessed autonomy and ultimate control over the facts. However, according to the lawyers, the sentence imposed on the former employee of Marcos Valério was significantly higher than that of her former boss, who was identified as the mastermind of the scheme.

"The convicted individual himself, considered the mastermind and originator of the alleged 'scheme,' received a fine lower than that of the appellant, amounting to 260 day-fines. The same can be said of other convicts from the so-called 'financial core,' including those from the 'financial core.' What is detected, therefore, is the undeniable contradiction between the amounts set, which, as suggested by the eminent reviewing minister Ricardo Lewandowski, deserve to be readjusted," the defense states in the appeal.

The appeal alleges an omission that is "extremely detrimental to the understanding of the judgment" and "to the knowledge of the convicted parties of the reasons that led to a possible conviction." According to Simone's lawyers, the omissions make it difficult to analyze the content of the judgment, and they also stated that some parts of the document are obscure, "with passages that become unintelligible, often with unanswered questions or answers without the corresponding question."

According to Yarochewsky, several excerpts from the votes and debates that took place in the plenary session do not appear in the judgment, "leaving only the indication that the content that should have been viewed was canceled." These cancellations, according to the defense, prevent access to relevant points regarding the merits of the criminal case, which are considerably complex.

The defense also cited that Justice Celso de Mello's vote regarding the crime of money laundering was completely overturned, leaving no mention of the issue in the decision.

In the appeal, Simone requests that the omissions and contradictions pointed out by the defense be remedied and that the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office be given access to the case file regarding the potential for reversal.

Click here to read Simone Vasconcelos's Motion for Clarification.