07.09.2012

 

PRESS RELEASE

 

The Public Information and Press Relations Bureau within the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice is authorized to bring to public knowledge the following:          

The Prosecutor General of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice presents the result of the scrutiny ordered on the 28.08.2012, by a specially designated prosecutor according to the provisions of article 65 paragraph 3 of the Law No.304/2004, corroborated with the provisions of article 3 paragraph 12 of the Regulation on the interior order of the prosecutor’s offices, having as subject “the way in which the criminal investigation was carried out in the criminal files concerning the defendant VLAD NICOLAE, taken over and joint by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, the Section of criminal prosecution and criminalistics ”.

Thus, the following conclusions resulted:

Concerning the three causes registered on the docket of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to Buftea Court of Law and in which criminal investigations were carried out against the defendant Vlad Nicolae regarding the perpetration of the offences of robbery and break-in – the victim M.E.M., respectively the offences of rape, robbery and break-in – the victim N.L., and also, the offence of rape – the victim P.S., the following facts were revealed:

1. On the 29.04.2012 at the Police of Otopeni City the complaint of the victim M.E.M. was filed concerning the unlawful break-in of an unknown person, of male gender, in her home situated in Balotesti City, being subjected to violence in order to be dispossessed of her mobile telephone.  After verifications were made, it was observed the fact that by ordinance against the defendant, VLAD NICOLAE, for a period of 30 days, the interdiction of leaving the city (Otopeni) in which he lives without the approval of the prosecutor was taken, for the period of 03.05.-01.06.2012 inclusively, the proposal of pre-trial arrest made by the police was rejected, the defendant being retained for 24 hours, starting with 2.08.2012. The evidences within the file at the moment when the proposal for pre-trial arrest was formulated at 03.05.2012 were the following: the statement of the victim M.E.M. given on 29.04.2012 in which it is mentioned the fact that the victim spotted the aggressor clearly and has no doubts regarding his recognition “because he had a common figure which I think I saw around Balotesti before”; a recognition report of the defendant  VLAD NICOLAE by the injured party after consulting photographs within the Imagetrack system database, dated from 29.04.2012; a group recognition report of the defendant  VLAD NICOLAE by the injured party, dated 02.05.2012; the statement of the witness G.I (the victim’s neighbor) dated 03.05.2012, resulting that initially the defendant came at his house window, around three o’clock, and the moment he approached the window, the defendant jumped over the fence and ran in the direction of the victim’s house (from the house window to the fence, which the defended climbed, there are around 2-3 meters), from where after a while screams were heard; the statement dated 30.04.2012 of the witness R.M. resulting the fact that he encountered VLAD NICOLAE that night, after three o’clock VLAD NICOLAE asked the witness R.M. “How are you?” and “Where are you going?”, but the latter ignored him being in a hurry to get to the crime scene, the home of his mother-in-law, being telephonically informed of what happened by the witness G.I.; the report of crime scene investigation dd. 29.04.2012 (a metallic nail was lifted that did not belong to the victim, assuming that it belonged to the perpetrator and used in order to open the window); the statement of the defendant VLAD NICOLAE dated 02.05.2012  given before the police, in which he did not admit the committing of the deed, pointing out the fact that at that moment he was at another location, in a club, although he confirmed the fact that he encountered the witness R.M. (the victim’s son-in-law) when he returned from the club, his statement of not admitting the deed was reiterated before the prosecutor.

In the resolution of rejecting the proposal for pre-trial arrest of VLAD NICOLAE, the prosecutor held the fact that the latter was criminally investigated by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the 1st District Court of Law, by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the 6th District Court of Law and by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Buftea Court of Law between 2008-2010 and was sanctioned with an administrative fine for committing 3 offences of aggravated theft. But after consulting the documents within the file, the prosecutor considered that the requirements for disposing the pre-trial arrest of a person were not met, requirements provided in the national provisions, as well as in the ECHR jurisprudence. Whereas, upon a pre-trial arrest proposal, the prosecutor had the obligation to verify first and foremost, that if within the file there are evidence or justified clues that the defendant has committed a deed envisaged by the criminal law (this direction is sustained by the ECHR jurisprudence: the Fox cause, Campbell and Hartley vs. Great Britain, 30.08.1990 and the cause Hilda Haftsteinsdottir vs. Iceland, 08.06.2004). Considering all the aspects mentioned above, in this case there were legitimate, plausible, credible suspicions that would have justified the pre-trial arrest of a person.

Out of the evidence administrated by the police bodies up to the formulation of the pre-trial arrest proposal resulted that there were enough justified clues in the case that the defendant VLAD NICOLAE perpetrated the deed for which the arrest was proposed. The procedural acts carried out by the police after the rejection of the pre-trial arrest proposal of VLAD NICOLAE have confirmed the perpetration of the offence by the latter: the witnesses’ statements; on the 29.04.2012 it was ordered by police bodies resolution, the accomplishment of the polygraph investigation concerning the detection of the emotional feed back of the defendant VLAD NICOLAE. The report was carried out at 04.07.2012 and it was mentioned that the answers at two relevant questions have caused specific changes of a faked behavior. Also, on 09.05.2012, by resolution, the police bodies have order the accomplishment of a genetic expertise in order to compare the genetic profile obtained from the biological traces of reference extracted  from the defendant VLAD NICOLAE with the genetic profile obtained from the biological traces of reference extracted  from the nail lifted from the crime scene. By address dated 01.06.2012, the National Institute of Judicial Medicine Mina Minovici has notified the Police of Otopeni City that the corpus delicti were received on 11.05.2012, and due to budgetary financial cuts, the expertise will be carried out only with the condition of the anticipate payment of the costs (approximately 600-1500 RON estimated cost), and the date for the accomplishment of the expertise is 30-60 days from the moment when all evidence are received and all costs are paid. By the reports dd. 20.06.2012 and 06.08.2012, the police workers have requested the allocation of the necessary funds in order for the expertise to be carried out.

2. On the docket of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Buftea Court of Law, at 01.03.2012, the criminal case was registered in which the criminal investigation was initiated “in rem” for the perpetration of the  offences  provided by Article 189 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Code, Article 197 (1) of the Criminal Code, Article 211 (1), (2) letter a), and (21)letter b) and c) of the Criminal Code, and Article 192  (2) of the Criminal Code with the application of Article 33 letter a) of the Criminal Code. In this case resulted that on the 26.02.2011, N.L. age 76, living in Balotesti city, has notified the police bodies that on the night of 25.02.2011, between 22.30-23.30, an unknown person has break-in her home, forcing the wood window of a closet and submitting her to violence, has dispossessed her of 420 RON and her mobile telephone, subsequently, being threat with a knife, he has engaged into forced normal and anal sexual intercourse with her. In the case, the crime scene investigation was carried out, activity resulting in biological traces (a single hand print trace remained in evidence). By address dd. 10.03.2011 issued by I.P.J.-Ilfov, Criminal Investigation Service, it was requested to the Forensic Service of I.P.J.-Ilfov, the comparison of the fingerprints remained in evidence with the fingerprints of eight persons, the defendant VLAD NICOLAE was not one of them, although he was among the suspects established by the police. By resolution dd. 27.04.2011, the criminal investigation bodies have ordered the accomplishment of a DNA genetic expertise, only concerning the traces lifted from the crime scene, but without the traces lifted from the victim following the forensic examination. On 09.08.2011 the technical-scientific report was issued mentioning that the genetic profiles of 4 out of the 8 persons that were compared are not identical and are not among the genetic profile obtained in the evidence within the file, but they found the profile of an unknown person. Thus, although biological traces were lifted on 28.02.2011, in order to establish the DNA profile of VLAD NICOLAE, in the resolution of the police worker within the I.P.J.-Ilfov, Criminal Investigation Service, by which the technical-scientific report was ordered on 27.04.2011, the establishment of the genetic profile of VLAD NICOLAE was not requested, as well as for the rest of 4 persons from whom traces were lifted. Thus, it was necessary that the establishment and comparison of the genetic profile of VLAD NICOLAE be performed, because: from the statement of the suspect dd. 26.02.2011 resulted the fact that at the time and hour when the deed was committed (the night of 25.02.2010, the timing between 22.30-23.30), he was present on the street where the victim lived, visiting a relative where he spent the night while the relative stated that he left the house around 22.00 o’clock. 

Although there were contradictions between the statements of the two men (contradictions that they do not try to clarify although they specifically referred to the place and time of the offense), the police authorities did not request the establishment of the genetic profile of the person named VLAD NICOLAE although, he was considered a suspect starting with the following day, when he had been heard and biological samples had been taken. We remind you that this case file was taken over by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Section of Criminal Investigation and Criminalistics as well, by Order of the Prosecutor and it is adjoined, as previously mentioned.

3. On 17.08.2012, the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Buftea Court of First Instance registered the case file concerning the minutes of proceedings on the ex-officio notification dated 09.08.2012, received from the Ilfov County Police Inspectorate, with regard to the fact that, in the period May – August 2010, the person named VLAD NICOLAE physically and sexually assaulted the person named P.S. in a repeated manner in her house in the commune of Baloteºti, reason for which the authorities started the investigations for the offense of rape, offence laid down under art. 197 par. 1 of the Criminal Code, committed by VLAD NICOLAE. In her statement, P.S. said that in the period May – August 2010, during the night, a man entered her house in Baloteºti, where she lived alone, and assaulted her physically and sexually, thing about which she spoke to the person who took care of her. P.S. stated that she could recognize the man because he lived in a block of studios facing her house. The statement of the witness mentioned the same, as she noticed that the victim had signs of physical aggression on her arms, neck, chest and mouth, and many times she found the window or the lock broken. Although she confirmed the physical aggression, the victim refused to tell her she had been sexually abused. Therefore, the witness notified the police by dialing 112 on 01.06.2010 and 13.06.2010. The intervention sheets show that a police agent wrote under the column Observations “not confirmed”, although he did not hear the witness, and the broken window, the broken lock showed beyond any doubt the perpetration of an offense. On 09.08.2012, when shown photos of the possible suspects, the victim P.S. was able to identify VLAD NICOLAE. This case file was also taken over by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Section of Criminal Investigation and Criminalistics by the same resolution of the Prosecutor General of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice.

4. The Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Bucharest 1st District Court of first instance ordered, by its resolution of 02.03.2012, the initiation of the criminal investigation, in rem, for the offense of rape, offense laid down under art. 197 par. 1 of the Criminal Code, and robbery, offense laid down under art. 211 par. 1, par. 2 point b and par. 21 point c of the Criminal Code, with application of art. 33 point c of the Criminal Code, as on the night of 01.03.2012, around 20:30 pm, an unknown author got in the house in Bucharest, by forcing the entrance door, after which, through acts of violence against the injured person A.A., he bereft her of money and goods and had sexual intercourse with her, by physical constraint. On 25.02.2012, the Police 5th Section registered the complaint of the person named S.M who claimed that on the night of 25.02.2012, around 21:30 pm, while she was in her house in Bucharest, an unknown person, male, forced the entrance door and got in her house, after which, through acts of violence against her he stripped her of several assets (the amount of 740 lei and gold jewels) and had sexual intercourse with her by constraint. By resolution no. 2662/P/2012, the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Bucharest 1st District Court of first instance ordered that the two case files be joined. Following the investigations conducted in the abovementioned case file, by the resolution of 02.03.2012, the 1st District Police – 5th Section ordered that technical – scientific and biocriminalistic findings be conducted so as to determine: if on the biological samples made available human biological traces can be found, the establishment of the genetic profile of the biological samples and if the genetic profiles discovered in the two cases are similar. Also, they requested the comparison of the genetic profiles with the ones in the data base of the National System of Judicial Genetic Data. By resolution dd. 05.03.2012 issued by the same police agent, the same forensic findings was ordered, with the same objectives, adding a new sample taken on 25.02.2012. The Criminalistics National Institute stated through its address dd. 24.04.2012 that “at the present moment, the activity of the Genetics Laboratory is suspended due to the lack of reactives.”

The documents in the file show that several witnesses were heard (neighbors) who, together with the injured party A.A., gave details regarding the physical aspect of a young man who had been seen at that time on the street where the offenses had been committed. The photo of the defendant VLAD NICOLAE was not presented to the witnesses so that they may recognize him. The person named VLAD NICOLAE was heard in this case on 26.07.2012, who stated that he could not remember if during 01.01.2012 – 31.03.2012 he had been in Bucharest, but he mentioned that whenever he came, he stayed at his uncle’s, and he also declared he agreed to the polygraph test. The documents enclosed to the case file show that, in the subsequent period, the defendant VLAD NICOLAE did not go through the polygraph test. This file was also taken over by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Section of Criminal Investigation and Criminalistics by order of the Prosecutor General of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice issued on 22.08.2012. after taking over the case, the Romanian Police General Inspectorate – the National Institute of Criminalistics – the Service of Biocriminalistics drafted the report on technical-scientific findings of 04.09.2012, in which they mentioned that the genetic analysis of the pieces of evidence concerning the victim S.M. outlined the genetic profile of the defendant VLAD NICOLAE.”

5. Then the death of the person named A.A. followed on 14.04.2012 at the “Prof. Dr. Dimitrie Gerota” Emergency Clinical Hospital – Bucharest (victim of the rape that happened on 01.03.2012), reason for which, on 17.04.2012, the prosecutor ordered that a forensic autopsy be performed. This case file was also taken over by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Section of Criminal Investigation and Criminalistics by order of the Prosecutor General, which was then to elucidate the existence or non-existence of a causal link between the offense of rape and the decease of the person named A.A. The expert’s report has not been filed yet.

6. On 06.08.2012, 11:35 hours, the dispatch desk of the Ilfov County Police Inspectorate was notified through the SNUAU (Unique National System for Emergency Calls) 112 by the person named S.M., from the commune of Baloteºti, for on 06.08.2012, around 11:00 a.m., while visiting his mother, S.T., aged 73, who lived in the commune of Baloteºti, found her dead in her house. Agent within the Ilfov Criminal Investigations Service went to the crime scene as well the operative team within the Otopeni Local Police, who investigated the crime scene and established that the person S.T. had been found deceased in her house, under suspicious conditions: the gases were switched on, the gas safety pin had been removed, she was only wearing a t-shirt and she had a bite mark on her shoulder, ecchymoses on her neck. Her night gown was found torn to pieces, hidden in the bathroom.

On 08.08.2012, the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Ilfov Tribunal registered the criminal case file concerning the decease of the person named S.T., investigation being conducted with regard to the perpetration of the offense of homicide, offense laid down under art. 174 of the Criminal Code (after the necropsy done on 07.08.2012, they decided that her deceased had been caused by a mechanical asphyxia through cervical-thoracic compression.) The criminal prosecutor order by resolution the performance of technical-scientific biocriminalistics findings which was to determine the DNA profile from the biological traces taken from the crime scene, the DNA profile of the deceased woman and to compare the resulted genetic profiles to the DNA profile of the person named VLAD NICOLAE, which had been done by the laboratory of the “Mina Minovici” National Institute of Forensic Medicine and set a due term for 08.09.2012.

For the investigations to go further, the criminal prosecutor ordered, by resolution, that odonthological technical-scientific findings be conducted as to the dental marks discovered when examining the body, which were to establish, among others, if the dental marks that had been taken had been left by the person named VLAD NICOLAE, for which he set as a due date the day of 14.09.2012. VLAD NICOLAE has not been heard neither by the police nor by the prosecutor, although he has been the main suspect in the case. Moreover, the case file contains an arrest warrant issued on 09.08.2012 by the prosecutor for the date of 10.08.2012. There isn’t any minutes of proceedings proving that the warrant had been executed but there is a photographic board illustrating the dental prints taken on 10.08.2012 in a mould, from the person named VLAD NICOLAE. Although investigations were conducted in the case with regard to the perpetration of the offense of the offense of homicide and two technical-scientific findings were requested, one can see that the prosecutor has not started the criminal investigation in the case, at least “in rem”, until the criminal is found and he did not take part in the crime scene investigation although there was clear evidence that a homicide had been committed. This case file was also taken over by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Section of Criminal Investigation and Criminalistics by order of the Prosecutor General of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice on 22.08.2012.

“The preliminary observations” made by the “Mina Minovici” National Institute of Forensic Medicine and sent to the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Section of Criminal Investigation and Criminalistics, on 31.08.2012, bring out the following: …“the genetic characters within the DNA reference profile of the suspect VLAD NICOLAE can be found entirely in the mixture of biological material, together with the genetic characters of the victim.”

7. On 16.08.2012, the named A.V., ad officer of the Embassy of Japan in Bucharest,  filed at the Police Section   of Sector 1 o claim by which he made known the fact that on 16.08.2012, around 18,00 he was announced by the Police in Craiova regarding the fact that  at this police unit has come a representative of the “Faculty for Foreign Languages”  mentioning that a Japanese volunteer named M.Y *she was to teach  Japanese languages at the Faculty for Foreign Languages Craiova), didn’t reach the  Faculty in Craiova, even if he has been announced  that she landed  at the  Otopeni Airport and was to come to Craiova by train, where he was waiting for her. The claim was registered  on 17.08.2012 at this  police unit, which started the  criminal investigations in the cause:  viewing of the video images captured by the  surveillance cameras posted  inside and outside the airport, which attest that VLAD NICOLAE leaves the airport together with the victim, the hearing of VLAD NICOLAE on 17.08.2012, the  preparation of the  record on 17.08.2012, in which is mentioned  the  calling number and the series of the SIM card of the mobile phone which belonged to the victim. On 17.08.2012 at the Prosecutor’s Office attached to Tribunal Ilfov was registered the criminal case regarding the ex officio claim of the prosecutor concerning the committing by unknown author of the offence  of murder, deed foreseen by art. 174 Criminal Code,  against a  female victim (County Police Inspectorate -  Service for  Criminal Investigations  brought to the knowledge of this prosecutor’s unit  about the fact that, on the territory of the  community  Corbeanca, Ilfov County, near the  forest at the road side  of DN1 has been found the  cadaver  of a woman,  covered voluntarily  with dried leafs ). On  17.08.2012, between 16.00 -19.15 was carried out the  investigation  on the spot, in the presence of the  prosecutor dealing with the case, of the  police officers, of the forensic specialists and of a assistant  witness , investigation  during which the found items where confiscated, a number of  four  biologic transfer traces and  taken made judicial pictures. By the resolution from 17.08.2012, at 21,00 hours , the prosecutor ordered the beginning of the  criminal prosecution against  unknown authors for the committing  of  murder, foreseen in art. 174 Criminal Code. On 17.08.2012, the case prosecutor  issued a warrant for  immediate  bringing  to the prosecutor’s office of the named VLAD NICOLAE, suspected  as the author of the  offence of murder. The warrant was executed on 18.08.2012, when VLAD NICOLAE was brought  before  the prosecutor and heard, as defendant,  after the accusation and  hid right  to defense was brought  to his knowledge. On 18.08.2012 the cadaver with unknown identity was identified in the person of the named M.Y, Japanese citizen. By the resolution  from 18.08.2012 the initiating of the  criminal pursuit against the named VLAD NICOLAE  was ordered  for committing the offence foreseen in art. 174 Criminal cod. The prosecutor held the fact that  in the evening of 15.08.2012, around 21.00 hours, the defendant  contacted the victim inside the Otopeni Airport, after which they entered together  into a taxi, asking the driver to let them on DN1,  on the territory of the Corbeanca community, in an area bordered  on both sides by forests, area in which subsequently was identified the cadaver of the victim M.Y. By the appraisal ordinance from 18.08.2012, was ordered the appraisal of VLAD NICOLAE, for a period of 24 hours. Following the resolution of the prosecutor  from 18.08.2012, in the case was prepared on 19.08.2012 a  technical – scientific ascertainment report, which holds, regarding the defendant VLAD NICOLAE specific changes of the simulated behavior  concerning  all the relevant questions. By the evidence brought into the case resulted the identification  and the recuperation of the  mobile phone of the victim. Also,  there resulted indices regarding the persons  in whose possession has been this mobile phone prior its selling to  the witness B.E., from whom it was recovered. From the verifications and the statements of the witnesses, it was established that on  her arrival  to Romania, on 15.08.2012, at 21,00 hours, the victim used that  phone, which was stolen  by the author after committing the deed. Bu the conclusion of the Tribunal Ilfov  - Criominal Section,  the carrying out of a domicile search at the domicile  of the defendant VLAD NICOLAE was authorized, from where several cloths  were confiscated,  about  which he  stated that  he has worn them  on 15.08.2012. Through the ordinance from 189.08.2012 was ordered the changing of the legal classification of the deed from  murder, foreseen by art. 174 Criminal code  into first degree murder, foreseen by art. 174 – 175  lett. i) Criminal Code. Through the ordinance from 19.08.2012 was ordered the initiating of the  criminal  action against the defendant VLAD NICOLAE, for committing the offence of  first degree murder, foreseen  by art. 174 – 175 lett. i) Criminal Code. By the decision from 19.08.2012 of Tribunal Ilfov – Criminal Section,  pronounced in the file,  the proposal of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to Tribunal Ilfov was admitted and the pretrial arrest against the defendant VLAD NICOLAE was ordered for a period of 29 days, beginning with 19.08.2012 until 16.09.2012 included, for committing the offence of first degree murder foreseen  by art. 174 – 175 lett. i) Criminal Code. The file was taken over  by the Prosecutor's Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Section fro criminal pursuit and criminalistics, by the ordinance pf the Prosecutor General. By resolution was ordered the carrying out of a forensic psychiatric expertise regarding the  defendant VLAD NICOLAE, expertise which is  ongoing.

            Conclusions:

            Having in view the results of the control carried out by the Prosecutor General  of the Prosecutor's Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, on 7.09.2012  the following were ordered:

            I. The notification of the  Superior Counsel of Magistrature – the Judicial Inspection, for disciplinary measures regarding the prosecutor WILHELM EMANUEL DUNCA from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to Trial Court Buftea (concerning  the deficiencies at point 1) and  the prosecutor PUNTARU DANUT from the Prosecutor’s Office  attached to Tribunal Ilfov (concerning  the deficiencies at point 6).

            II. The notification of the Ministry of Administration and Interior under two aspects:

            II.1.  For ordering  disciplinary measures against the police officers who have worked in the causes, having in view the sever  deficiencies in the management and  assessment of  the specific evidence  in  offences against the life (rape, robbery and murder). Because the verifications revealed  that the  samples  of the  victim  of the rape were not  evaluated under genetic aspect  by the police bodies, that there have been ascertained  deficiencies  in the evaluation of the  evidences brought into the case (statements of the suspect, of the witnesses,  verifications of the alibis  of the suspect), that  they have carried out  a criminal on spot verification in a murder case in the absence of the prosecutor, but  also a superficial  way in which the  claims  filed by one of the  victims in 2010  were investigated (described at point 2 and point 3), the initiating  of the  disciplinary procedure  is necessary  to be ordered by the Ministry of Administration and Interior.  In all the analyzed cases, resulted a “modus operandi” of the defendant VLAD NICOLAE, which could have been noticed by the  criminal prosecution bodies, if an analyses of the  sever violent deeds committed in  the Ilfov county would have been carried out ( of the seven files, five were dealt with  by the Prosecutor’s Office attached  to the  Trial court  Buftea and  the Prosecutor’s office attached to Tribunal Ilfov).

 

            II.2. Under the same aspect, having in view that the Ministry of Administration and Interior has legislative initiative, the Ministry of Administration and Interior was requested to initiate the demarches of  legislative changes. The conditioning of the carrying out of the  expertise by their  payment, as long as the authorities involved  in the judicial demarche are  public institutions, is generating  delays and the analyzing of a discount formula between the public institutions is necessary.

           

            We mention that, at the level of the Public Ministry a demarche for legislative changes is not possible, as the institution has no legislative initiative, but the prosecutor General  of the Prosecutor's Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice requested also previous the public authorities, who  have  such a legislative initiative, for  measures in this respect.

            Moreover, at the level  of the Public Ministry, in the cases  in which the prosecutors  order  such expertise, these are  currently  paid.  Besides,  for this purpose the Public Ministry realizes  also a monthly statistic and a current control of these expenses, and according to the data, on 31.07.2012 the institution didn’t appear with arrears regarding judicial expenses. In the public area it was alleged that at the level of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to Tribunal Iasi there have existed such  unpaid expertises. After verification the existence of 4 invoices regarding such  costs  from the current month (august) was established on the day of the press release, but these invoices were  paid according to the day of the opening of the funds for  materials on 24 of each month, so that  they were paid.

 

            III. The notifying of the  Forensic Institute “Mina Minovici” because it was found that the expertises are  not carried out until the costs are not prior paid. Under this aspect, even if they are not  paid in advance, the expertises  must be carried out in order to be collected immediately and without loosing  precious time in the investigation of the cases of murder, rape and robbery. Thus,  the payment of the cost of the expertise should not condition  its carrying out,  in order  to assure the celerity   in the carrying out of the investigation in a criminal cause, otherwise the life and bodily integrity of several persons being at risk.