Four years in prison and 753,454 euros. This is the Cáceres County Court. two defendants atrium robbery. The court found guilty in the sentence, published this morning and to which this newspaper has access. Priscila Lara Guevara and Constantin Dumitru With the high value of the bottles and aggravating reasons, he is sentenced to commit theft in a public institution. four years, four and a half years in prison, respectively.
Thus, the court preserved the tendency of the prosecution, which had a similar penalty demand as in the decision, and classified the crimes in its upper half. Therefore, they must remain in prison and pay the insurer more than 750,000 Euros for the value of the stolen wines. The defense had suggested that it would appeal if convicted at the end of last week’s trial. There is an objection to the opinion with TSJEx.
The sentence was made public just days after the trial was held, following the dynamics of the order’s agility. The trial was held over two days and was the most publicized trial in the city’s history. Each time both the staff and the police closed the siege on the two defendants and even came to know them. The DNA test in the room on the second day was decisive as it coincided with Priscila and Dumitru’s. However, the defense maintained that their client’s accusations were based on evidence.
The State Court gives full validity to the statements and evidence presented during the trial. “The testimony of seven witnesses, the owner and staff of the hotel, and the nine national police officers who conducted the trial, the presence of five experts, and the documents included in the trial, which could not be reproduced orally, were evaluated at the trial. The court does not have the slightest doubt about authorship.” It is also emphasized that the defendants refused to answer questions. “The absence of an alternative explanation by the defendant, an explanation “requested” by the prosecution evidence and in a position that only the accused could provide, could, by simple common sense reasoning, lead to the conclusion: there is no alternative explanation.
Another important point that reinforces his view is the recognition of the accused as “credible” and “credible”. During the trial, at least two witnesses recognized Priscila and Dumitru as the perpetrators. “The only night worker at the hotel no doubt recognized Priscila at the oral hearing, but the one who recognized her by force was the police inspector who went to pick up the defendants from Barajas airport after they were arrested. He was handed over by the Croatian authorities and stated that they were “undoubtedly” the same people who appeared on the cameras.
Precisely, the court also points to the DNA test that “proves that they were the ones who spent the night at the hotel.” “Other evidence cited identifies them as people appearing in camera footage entering and leaving the room, and in the rest of the hotel rooms.”
Finally, gather the rest of the evidence, such as Priscila’s identification with a fake passport, the phone recording that reveals they were interviewing at the time of the events, Dumitru’s history of a previous robbery, traffic camera footage. after the facts place them both at a certain distance.
Therefore, “DNA testing proves that the defendants were in room 107 of the hotel on the night of October 26-27. Circumstantial evidence proves that they were the perpetrators. Evidence that could be considered an accusation that would undermine the presumption of innocence, provided they meet certain guarantees in their consensus and motives”.
Regarding the crimes they were convicted of and the aggravating situation resulting from the value of the bottles, the County Court states that “for things of historical value, it is necessary to include all, not just those of the common heritage.” Things of comparable historical value, such as bibliographic collections, volumes, books, engravings, and plates and objects from the 15th, 17th and 19th centuries.” It also implies that the value of the wines after evaluation exceeds 50,000 euros, which should be considered high value. for the minimum value.
Proven facts
In the sentence, the Court notes that Dumitru has been convicted at least four times, including three for theft and one for domestic violence. The court considers it as “proven facts that the defendants Constantin Dumitru and Priscila Lara Guevara, without a criminal record, stayed at the Atrio hotel on 26 October 2021 for the purpose of mutual agreement and obtaining illegal benefits. Later on 1 June, 13 June and 12 August 2021. They knew about the event because they planned it in advance.”
“The booking was made by a woman who was using a fake Swiss passport and was carrying a backpack that only appeared to have no weight when taken carelessly by an employee.” Then the man came to dinner and stayed at the hotel without registration. After having dinner at the restaurant located here, they toured the winery with a guide. At around 12:20 they went up to room 107.
The next day, on October 27, at around 02:10 am, while implementing a plan drawn up between the two defendants, the defendant called the reception and asked for a salad to be served repeatedly to one employee. He was in the hotel-restaurant at that moment. The receptionist accepted the request, refusing to fulfill the order, stating that she was alone and was taken aback by the request because they ate a 14-course tasting menu, and accepted at Priscila’s insistence. it will take at least 20 minutes to serve the requested one.
The employee went to the kitchen, for a moment the accused went to the reception and took the electronic key that he went to the pantry, he could not open it because it was not the right key. The employee returned to the reception after removing the salad. From the cellar door, she called Priscila to come back to entertain the receptionist.
So, minutes later, the defendant repeated the call to reception, this time to ask for a dessert, the employee objected once again and finally agreed to bring him some fruit. Estanislao returned to the reception and took master key 27 from a box, opened the cellar and entered the tasting room with it, where he found bottles of wine worth 1,648,500 euros, including the Chateau d’Yquem de 1806, which he had stacked. In a backpack and two large bags, the clerk rushes into the room before returning to reception.
After the robbery, the suspects left the hotel in a hurry at around 5 am, and two bags with a backpack and two bags of bottles in which he had put four towels he had taken from the bathroom of the hotel room set out to prevent them. “On October 27, at 06:41 in the morning, at 218.75 kilometers of the A-5 highway in the direction of Madrid, he got into a red Mercedes vehicle controlled by traffic cameras, which has been used by the defendants since at least April 26, 2021 and jingled among themselves.”
The real unknown: Where are the wines?
The truth is, some questions about the Atrio case were answered during the trial. However, whether the defendants were convicted or not, the biggest unknown is where the bottles are.
While this point, which the insurer made after indemnifying the hotel owners, was of interest to the prosecution, it was hardly mentioned throughout the trial to clarify its location. The defendants’ refusal to answer the parties’ questions did not help either. His defense has always denied that they knew where they were, as they were not thieves.
Only one of the Atrio’s owners, Jose Polo, has spoken on the subject, continuing the hypothesis that it was a robbery upon request. In fact, he was in favor of bargaining with thieves to get the wine back.