The defense, in an appeal calling for clarification, wanted the case law of the STJ to be taken into account according to which the combination of excessive speed and drunk driving, without the demonstration of other concrete elements, would not be sufficient to conclude that there was a possible intention.
Judge Alessandra da Rocha Lima Roidis, of the 1st Criminal Court of the Capital, was categorical: “it was clear in the decision that the possibilities of dangerous driving, speed and excessive passengers, the possibility of influence of chemical substances and escape after the events were taken into account, which, evaluated together, prove, in theory, capable of signaling the characterization of a possible intention for the purposes of pronouncement”. In other words: call refused.
About The Author
