Confusing legal process

Is not confusing at all, the DA wants to use him as an "example" to others...
Omega being popular would get the message across that you "the regular folk" will not be lucky if caught...

Chip said:

Apparently you still don't understand, how can the DA further charges against Omega if there is no evidence nor wintnesses????

Click to expand...

She had already made the allegations to the police and as the man was requested by the court, they simply made-up. She wanted to drop the charges against him, but the DA wants to make his case roar to the unbelievers...
He never showed up to the court appointed sessions... So he got arrested and brought over to the bench...

In the DR only the DA or the judge can bring to termination litigation on court. Not the complainant or the aggressor...

Chip said:

What does "bring to termination litigation on court" mean? - please reword.

Nonetheless, if you are trying to say that the DA can prosecute a person with no evidence or witnesses I would still say that is quite confusing.

Click to expand...

It means the process has begun, and now it has to run its course.

The laws pertaining to spousal abuse in this country are pretty much overkill but were put in place in an attempt to correct a serious problem. Ironic maybe that a law intended to stop abuse is so easy to abuse, but whatever.

Too bad men don't get the same protection, Dominican women fly in to violent rages pretty frequently from what I have seen.

If all it took was someone recanting his/her accusation, then all hell would break loose in the DR.
As soon as you would accuse someone of anything and they got incarcerated, the friends and family would find you really quick and make it 100% clear that if you didn't withdraw the charges, it would affect your health.
That is why this guy's still in jail.
One, to be sure that it's not a case of the plaintiff being threatened and 2, to illustrate to everyone that if you do throw someone in jail, it's serious business.
Cop shops and jails are not community clinics.
This is the real deal and it's a serious game and the powers that be make sure that it is perceived that way by all.

Chip said:

I understand the DA wants to make a point. However, are you guys saying that they can convict someone here without evidence nor witnesses, as specificaly in this case the wife has withdrawn the charges and will not testify and I'm assuming from her recant that there would be no physical evidence of abuse either?

Click to expand...

In theory, yes, but it all gets resolved with time and money.

Chip said:

It appears you are saying that a conviction here can be had without evidence or witnesses. If that is the case is it because the later two items aren't required for conviction or are we just to assume they have been falsificated?

Would it be possible that in this case the DA is just playing his cards to hold Omega as long as possible to make a point, even though he knows at some time in the near future Omega will have to be released?

Click to expand...

The DA can use her original complaint to prosecute. When she made her initial complaint they gathered as much information as they could on the alleged incident, therefore the evidence comes to be in judging the moral character of the aggressor.

In the DR, making a false accusation can and will land both parties in jail until things get sorted out.

Omega failed to show up as requested in court, this poses a grave charge unto his moral character to begin with...

Guidelines regarding domestic abuse have changed drastically in the DR in response to the spike in cases of such incidents in the past years.
Judges now have more leeway in such cases. Holding a person for as long it may seem needed is not against the law, always that the DA presented enough evidence to claim coercion or pressure to drop the charges by the defendant towards the victim.

Like I said, all they needed is the initial report she filed against Omega to follow course...

This case presents nothing strange at all...

Chip said:

Say you.


.

Click to expand...

And me too.
It happens all the time.
Bear in mind that the folks in the legal system, make money from folks who buy their way out, and the longer you're in, or that you think you might be in, the more you are willing to pay to get out.

Chip said:

Being that I live here I am aware of the corruption - my issue was whether a person can be convicted without witnesses or evidence. I understand what Pichardo is saying that it can happen but honestly don't believe he is correct.

I do believe that it is possible that suspects are allowed to be interned here without their case being advanced for some period of time and I believe that is actually what is happening in this case based on the facts that it is hard enough to get a conviction here if the person has money or if the victims are disinterested in pursuing it.

Click to expand...

Yes, any person can be prosecuted without a witness after the effect...
Once a complaint is made and found to be violating any laws of the DR, the DA can file the corresponding paperwork to bring the person to justice in court.

Once the victim makes a declaration, even if the person later disappears or won't assist the prosecution with the case, the DA employs the tools available to him by the code to prosecute the aggressor as intended by the law in such case.

The evidence is the original written declaration of the complainant, in which case was found to have grounds for litigation and therefore in direct violation of the code that applies to such case.

Furthermore, if the original victim fails to cooperate with the prosecution, they can be charged with penal violations that could land them in jail as well... Obstruction of justice to name one...

Like I said, it falls to the DA or the judge in charge of the case to dismiss the case or follow the code to the last "z"...

The Dominican law system is based loosely (as many changes have taken place since) in the French Napoleonic codes...

The case as presented:

The Department of Domestic Violence (Departamento de Violencia Intra Familiar) received the accusatory declaration of two (2) women against Omega, one from his wife and the second from a clerk at Tia Tania's Motel.

The incident with the clerk came about after the clerk asked that the merenguero satisfied the bill he had there already for services rendered. After a brief discussion Omega is accused by the clerk of using physical violence in her person along the verbal abuse that comes about in such incidents...

After the wife made the accusation a psychological evaluation was done in which the victim presented all the characteristics of a victim of domestic violence.

An evaluation was also practiced to Omega and was found to reflect signs of aggressiveness and an extremely violent conduct.

The wife reflected the usual conduct after the events by which they see their partners with less aggression and therefore not guilty of the abuse they received at their hands...

The order to impose a three month jail time to remove any instance that he may further abuse or interfere with the women, was ordered by the judge as soon as he made himself absent to the judicial citation to court and questioning...

The wife now claims that it was due to jealousy that she got beat up by the merenguero, something that they expected as in other cases where victims don't break away from their abusers...

The DA will follow the law to the "t" regarding his case and as I said before "won't need the wife to prosecute as the law permits in such cases"...

The initial complaint and evaluations done, adding the clerk's continuing to support the prosecution will without doubt make things sticky for Omega for the time being...

Chip said:

my issue was whether a person can be convicted without witnesses or evidence. I understand what Pichardo is saying that it can happen but honestly don't believe he is correct.

Click to expand...

Yes, he is correct.
It's not what typically happens, but it certainly can and does happen.

Chip said:

I just got finished watching "Los Duenos del circa" and the guest lawyers stated Omega was jailed because he failed to appear before court in Feb. on a recent domestic violence and also failed to attend a counseling session.

Also, the shows announcers had the same questions I did about how they could keep the guy jailed without witnesses or a complaint - this leads me to believe Dominican law does not support jailing people without witnesses or evidence.

Click to expand...

I have not followed this case nor the reporting of it but IF the facts are as stated by you Chip, Omega is being held for reasons OTHER than the domestic violence case which has not been proven either way. Are you (& the announcers of the program) confusing things?

The domestic violence case was brought to Court (apparently) & the 'accused' failed to appear to appear before the Court (Contempt??). In his absence the Court passed a ruling (rightly or wrongly) & the 'accused failed to abide by that ruling (More Contempt?). Does not this allow for a Court to insist on the accused's detention? It does in most countries that I know of - Napoleonic Law or otherwise!

Further (& possibly more contentiously) going on to your comments about the SEPARATE domestic violence case, an accusation was made by the 'victim' & the Fiscals made an investigation. THEY determined that there was sufficient evidence for a case to be heard & the withdrawing of evidence by the 'victim' does not necessarily mean that there is then insufficient evidence to continue with the case - the fiscals may think differently. The COURT may (or may not) agree & the case is then dropped or continued with according to the Judge hearing the submissions. If the 'accused' refuses to show to give HIS side of the submissions, then the Law (Napoleonic in this country) is more than correct in calling for the detention of him due to his violating a Court order - to attend the Court Hearing!

The ONE is not dependent on the other being proven. Seems logical to me ~ Grahame.