The lawyer Adrian Cuculis claims that those from ISU are hand in hand with those from Ferma Dacilor.
Adrian Cuculis claims that “ISU had frequent meals” in the Ferma Dacilor complex. As proof, an invoice issued by the company for “table services” at the event of an “ISU Prahova NGO” is presented.
According to the document, the event took place on August 7/8, 2019. The beneficiary of the services is the Salvatorii Prahoveni Association.
“The bomb of the moment in the case of Ferma Dacilor. A person who claims that he “had a little time left to authorize” Dinicu to obtain the fire safety permit, shows the fact that ISU had frequent meals at Ferma Dacilor.
The ISU Prahova NGO itself, buys festive meal services” from him, a fact which, in my opinion, shows that this is why it was allowed to operate. (…) PS: festive meal 2019/ last ISU Prahova control. The association belongs to those from ISU Prahova”, lawyer Cuculis said.facebook
The event meal services had a total value of 2500 lei, according to the invoice.
Read also: Cornel Dinicu, the first statements after he escaped from preventive detention and slept at home: “There is no difference”
The owner of the Dacilor Farm, where 8 people died, escaped arrest. The judges at the Prahova Court admitted the appeals filed by the three administrators of the Ferma Dacilor complex to the decision regarding the proposal to extend the preventive measures made by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Prahova Court.
Thus, the measure of preventive arrest was replaced with the measure of house arrest for the defendant Dinicu Cornel, for a period of 30 days from the date of the decision.
Read also: Cornel Dinicu, owner of Ferma Dacilor, first statements after being released from prison: “A misfortune. Specialists will determine”
He did not give many statements to the press. Asked by journalists how is the first night at home after the incident, he said: “There is no difference”.
Various obligations and restrictions are imposed on the defendant, including the presentation to judicial bodies upon request, the prohibition to communicate with other persons involved in the case or with the witnesses and experts appointed in the case. In case of bad faith violation of the measure or the imposed obligations, it can be replaced by preventive detention.
Also, the decision provides for the replacement of the measure of house arrest with the measure of judicial control for two other defendants, Ristin Vitomir-Adrian and Ilie Adelina-Elena, for a period of 60 days from the date of the decision.
Each defendant under judicial control has the obligation to appear before the criminal investigation bodies upon request, to inform the court about the change of residence and to comply with other specific restrictions imposed by the measure of judicial control.