Brazilian man who harassed Russian woman was punished for failing to pay child support.
One of the Brazilians appearing in the video where a group of men wearing the national team jersey harass a young Russian woman has been identified as Diego Valença Jatobá, former Secretary of Tourism of Ipojuca (PE). While in office, he was convicted in 2012 for misuse of public funds and for allegedly owing R$ 37.561,83 in alimony to his ex-wife, according to the courts.
247 One of the Brazilians appearing in the video where a group of men wearing the national team's jersey harass a young Russian woman has been identified as Diego Valença Jatobá, former Secretary of Tourism of Ipojuca, in the Metropolitan Region of Recife. This is the municipality where Porto de Galinhas beach is located.
While in office, the then-minister was convicted in 2012 for misuse of public funds and for allegedly owing R$ 37.561,83 in alimony to his ex-wife, a case that began in 2014. In this case, Judge Ana Emília de Oliveira Melo, of the 3rd Family and Civil Registry Court of Pernambuco, ordered the freezing of a bank account. The case is currently in the first instance. This information comes from Globo.
Diego has already been convicted by the Pernambuco State Court of Auditors (TCE-PE) for irregularities in the city's 2012 financial statements. An appeal is still possible.
According to the court proceedings, Jatobá violated Article 89 of the Bidding Law, which addresses the waiver of bidding for contracts outside the cases stipulated by law. The agency stated that R$ 2.212.866 was spent on 12 waiver processes for the purchase of school desks, literacy kits, supplementary textbooks, and the hiring of artists, all without bidding, and the last item irregularly, by the Ipojuca City Hall.
Jatobá filed two appeals to contest the decision. Both were judged. One upheld the rejection of the municipality's accounts but extinguished the debt of the fine. The other appeal, a motion for clarification, was denied by the TCE-PE (Court of Accounts of Pernambuco). The court argued that there was no omission, contradiction, or obscurity in the decision of the body itself. The process is still ongoing, and the last movement was in April 2018.