First application to San Marino of the plea bargain, the clarification of the lawyer Bugli: “The question was not framed in the right dimension”
We receive and publish
With regard to some articles published in some local newspapers in recent days, it is specified that the issue has not been framed in the right dimension.
The rule on plea bargaining was invoked at the first useful hearing by the undersigned on behalf of his client which entered the previous day.
From the tenor of the article it is not clear whether those who made their observations not because of the deontologically reprehensible facts (talking about a dead drunk subject is out of place) complained about the rule, the case in question or more questions.
It is true that there are no norms in the law in question, but the Judge gave his interpretation while respecting the regulatory text.
Speaking of injury, even of civil parties, makes no sense, because no one is injured and the Italian plea bargaining is similar.
Sorry to hear complaints outside a courtroom hoping to invoke who knows what popular sentiments or bring out indignation.
The rule had been invoked for some time and is intended to deflate the proceedings by guaranteeing speediness to the proceedings. It is not up to this imposed defense whether the law is done right or wrong or wrong, the defense uses the tools it has at its disposal. Then everything can be improved.
The writer does not like advertising and if it ends up in the media it is only because of the relevance of the process. The application of the benefits provided for by a law has been requested which, among other things, must still be granted, but in the newspapers it is not good to qualify or, worse, apostrophize defendants and above all the injured party has nothing to lose since negotiating means admitting responsibility.
Thanks in advance for the publication.
Paride Bugli