And explain what criminal law is like here to the audience, because I think
the American series that illustrate on the subject, like Sutts or the other that
How To Whore and that Vaina or Coberto col Sol and all that series,
which are from the life of lawyers. People believe that law and justice in
the Dominican Republic works as they see it in the series. And one of
the reasons why here we came up with the idea of having Juan Arturo participate
was one day in the Chinese neighborhood eating and talking about law and I realized
talking to three lawyers of the same generation. We were on Saturdays comedies or
shit and Vaina was more with the interest of me to learn from them that
they learn nothing from me and I realized talking about simple subjects that is nonsense
that should be super understood by anyone that, regardless of whether I was discovering
neither the wheels nor the warm water, we ignored the simplest elements of laws
and republic law in Dominican republic, because sometimes you hear people. Not here,
because they' re not supposed to sue. Here it is not demanded
as it is demanded in the United States, which is a national sport.
Ah not clear that for everything here, based on civil law, there are
a number of questions, almost everything depending on what and you can well motivate
a lawsuit, but it is a cumbersome process. In America, you file
a lawsuit, and that takes half an hour. Here it is a subject
to fatten a tea more difficult than you have not been accompanied by a good
legal advice, because you can end up losing a lot of money and a
lot of time thinking that you will get some repair for some given fact.
So, based on that reasoning and other issues also that have to do with
criminal law and with many issues that people do, after that it is not
that that is not so. Something as simple as what a consult that made
me a friend about his son and his girlfriend, than a void that has
the minor' s code. His sixteen- year- old son had love
with a sixteen- year- old, but the following year he turned eighteen.
He' s already sixteen. So, in that relationship he' s
an elder with a minor, that is, he' s already of age,
but the law of the Minor' s Code says nothing about that,
but I did give him I didn' t tell him Mr. I don
' t know any such cases. But if the family is old enough to
fuck up, they can screw it up because it is still underage and the
code makes no exception, except among minors, especially in sexual consent. Parents
can' t give or consent to not. She' s sixteen, he
' s twenty. They can have love. The code doesn' t admit
that. Neither does the minor' s code say anywhere. He makes an
exception in that case. You say that if the age difference between the two
minors is greater, to six years is abuse, to five years is abuse,
is abuse? What he says. But when they' re both minors,
let' s say pure eleven and one, sixteen or one. There
' s abuse. But those simple things like that, as simple as that,
are confusing a lot of people, because when the vander Franco thing happened
here, I' ve heard a lot of people say on radio and TV
no, but she was sixteen and he was nineteen, or she was sixteen
and he was twenty, under five. That' s not what the law
says It literally explains that article of the Children' s Code, and here
he explained it. And obviously, there' s a lot more to it.
So what this week that we have so many digital criminals, yesterday I
saw an analysis of a listener and I kept it because also people don'
t understand what due process is and you lose in that and I have always
told you here. In many media cases, sometimes opinionologists make people think that
there will be a sentence in one way the party is interested. They'
re going public relations with the cases. They' re done in public relations.
For them then it' s like they' re tollets. It comes
from the sentence, the judge applies the law and feasts on the collective imaginary
what in law has been done correctly, but that in opinionology has been misreported.
When the girl from San Francisco, the teenager Emely died here, everyone
thought Marlyn Martine was going to be thrown thirty years into another judicial system.
Perhaps she would have put him on the chain, but justice as it works
and this structure of the Dominican Republic and the criminal offences that exist for which
she could establish a responsibility does not carry a greater penalty than she received.
It is that alberto when then people have to understand that Dominican Republic law is
not like in the United States. Stop watching American series and learn to understand
better, because then they get frustrated and worse, as the good friend says,
give me to see it. I' ve got it around here I
' d say it here in my favorite he. I say if you don
' t want to feel bad about Dominican sentences, there is a French series
that is why our law exactly comes, because as long as we continue to
see and take as a reference to the United States, they will not succeed,
because they are totally different systems. And this I won' t say
to disqualify anyone who sometimes when you don' t understand something, it'
s best to try or get informed or understand what things are like. That
' s not that a judge a fucking or insensitive. It is that the
field of action, the range of action that a judge has to make a
decision, is what the law commands, is what the law establishes, is
what the codes say. And when he talks to you about due process,
as the friend Marinovinincio Castillo grandson says, writes yesterday and explains to him,
explains in a tweet that he says your rights explained, says he still without
reviewing the terms of a conviction. It is important to keep in mind that
this is written by a lawyer. Hey, don' t think it'
s being written by a digital voicemail. In fact, he' s a
boy, although he' s his is making life on Twitter by a person
who likes to walk away from controversies and vaginas, but he does an analysis
to try to help digital channelology to get some understanding of design. Judges cannot
rule on facts that have not been proven, and so deliberation proceedings, where
they must verify all the evidence and testimonies of the parties, may last,
as they do, for a long time to add, while the analysis of
the evidence of the proceedings may last. Judges must be careful when drafting their
judgments, since they must be able to withstand subsequent scrutiny both factual and factual
legal is, in fact, concrete evidence so that they understand more or less
juridically from hierarchically superior courts. A first- degree sentence containing conviction is usually
appealed by those affected. Even the possible sentence of appeal could, if the
legal requirements are met, be appealed in cassation that those have to explain to
the scoundrel, that they do not know what cassation and none of that before
the supers more court of justice. The time spent in pretrial detention during the
proceedings would be calculated for the purpose of determining the longer period of exclusion that
must also be explained to the people. Many people do not understand it has
still been convicted in the first instance, they continue to be pretrial prisoners,
since they have in their favour legal deadlines that would appeal decisions for which the
sentence has not yet been acquired. The authority of things evocably judged that that
is another concept that you make people understand. Once the sentence has been confirmed,
any case and the degree it acquires must be completed by the convicted persons.
The judge of the execution of the sentence, after fulfilling all the requirements,
may order the conditional release of the convicted person, provided that the convicted
person has completed at least half of the period to which he was sentenced.
In general, these media advances, he says, in parentheses return a cigno
every request for parole, in other words, and in particular in this case,
now that mambo is missing he hears,