The ugly truth behind the Romanian Anticorruption Fight: When some judges and DNA prosecutors trial after death: Dan Adamescu’s case

Although the family have send no more than 5 written requests through their lawyers within 7 months, the first one send immediately after his premature death on 27 January 2017, the authorities – The National Institute of Legal Medicine denied the right of the family to receive it and passing the responsibility to the prosecutor investigating the ” suspicious death of Dan Adamescu” Mr. Eusebiu Serbanoiu from The Bucharest Court.

Mr. Eusebiu Serbanoiu delegated two police officer from the Homicide Direction within the Romania Police for further investigations – Inspector Adrian Lazar and Sub- Commissioner in the person of Mr. Lupescu, but until this day none of the judiciaries answered or provided the family the autopsy report.

Who is responsible for Dan Adamescu’ s premature death?

Urmărește-ne în Discover

Adaugă-ne ca sursă preferată

Looking back, two DNA prosecutors and their Chiefs, constantly refused him the medical treatment since they targeted him in June 2014 – DNA prosecutor Danut Volintiru and his chief Claudiu Dumitrescu former head of DNA Direction II. They both withdraw from the case in March 2016 and in their place, were appointed the DNA prosecutor Adrian Matei and his chief Marius Bulancea known as the personal advisor to Laura Codruta Kovesi as luju.ro revealed. Within less than 2 years from which 4 months spent in pretrial arrest, one year spent in house arrest and 9 months in prison, Dan Adamescu died. He went into Coma during his appeal to the release on parole (20 December 2016) and died 5 weeks later in the hospital, his family being denied the access to stay by his side.

Decision no.2847/23.11.2016, hearing of 23.11.2016 Case no.27918/4/2016 Romania. Court IV Bucharest: Presiding judge – Simon Raluca Oana, Court clerk – Geana Ludeanu Costiana
The Public Ministry – Prosecutor’s Office under the High Court of Justice – the National Anticorruption Directorate was represented by the Prosecutor Cojocaru Daniel:
The defendant of the petitioner requests his release on probation having fulfilled his legal fraction from the sentence of 4 years and 4 months of imprisonment. A particular concern is the extremely bad health condition of the petitioner.

The court appreciated that, at this moment, the convict is not eligible for release on probation, as a consequence, shall reject his request for release on probation as groundless.
Decision no. 690/c. 21.12. 2016 Calling procedure in file no. 27918/4/2016: Romania. Ilfov Court: Presiding Judge Razvan Pastila, Court Clerk Vasi Victoria, Public Ministry – Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, the National Anticorruption Direction was represented by the prosecutor Gina Bulat.

The Court admitted his legal fraction to apply for release on parole was fulfilled ” The Court finds that in this case the condition for the execution of the fraction of the penalty imposed by the law is fulfilled”, and continues ” it is also incontestable the poor health of the applicant in the present case, which is evident from the medical records filed both in the substantive and procedural stage of the appeal” , instead decides to reject his release on parole as it follows: ”