{"id":1222,"date":"2021-05-11T09:24:51","date_gmt":"2021-05-11T07:24:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/labfirm.it\/?p=1222"},"modified":"2021-05-10T20:17:46","modified_gmt":"2021-05-10T18:17:46","slug":"stalking-occhio-alle-dichiarazioni-della-vittima","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/labfirm.it\/en\/stalking-occhio-alle-dichiarazioni-della-vittima\/","title":{"rendered":"Stalking: Watch out for the victim's statements"},"content":{"rendered":"
The Freedom Tribunal rejected the request for review by the suspect for the crime of persecutory acts<\/strong>. The Tribunal of Freedom<\/strong> he had instead limited himself to assessing what the offended person said before the police, from whose declarations it emerged the existence of the facts attributed to the suspect, who had threatened the injured person with an unjust evil even trying to break into his home.<\/p>\n On the other hand, another truth emerged from the subsequent statements of the injured person made to the defendant in the defense investigations. Basically, the constituent elements of the crime referred to inart. 612 bis<\/strong> of the Penal Code<\/strong> and consequently the precautionary needs of the suspect.<\/p>\n The Cassation in fact, having the Court of Review omitted to consider the further declarations of the injured person, thus incurring an evident lack of motivation (because the new reasons of defense were connected to these new declarations) cancels the contested order.
\nThe suspect appealed to the Supreme Court, alleging that the Review<\/strong> it had not taken into consideration the new reasons and the declarations of the injured person produced by the defense (following defensive investigations) of the opposite sign compared to what was reported by the victim of stalking in front of the judicial police.<\/p>\nThe defensive investigations.<\/h2>\n
\nFirst of all, the repeated conduct<\/strong> that the law requires for the configuration of the crime of stalking<\/strong>, having instead the conduct occurred in the space of only 12 hours.
\nSuch conduct also would not have actually caused the victim of stalking a persistent and severe state of anxiety<\/strong>, nor would they have involved a change in the life habits of the injured person<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
\nThe Supreme Court specifies that the Freedom Tribunal will have to assess the reliability of the original ones statements from the victim of stalking<\/strong>, denied by the defensive investigations carried out by the defense.<\/p>\nHow to properly carry out defensive investigations.<\/h3>\n