On the basis of a DNA report, the first panel of the STF acquits those convicted of rape | Politics

With the decision, group ministers understood that the allocation of DNA was more valuable as evidence than recognition by the victim and witnesses.

The case trial was resumed on Tuesday with the vote of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Luiz Fux, who in October asked for more time to badyze the issue.However, two other ministers had already asked to be heard – Alexander de Moraes and Rosa Weber.

Fux broke the lawsuit and voted for the 39. Earlier, Rosa Weber did the same and accompanied the case reporter, Minister Marco Aurélio Mello, for to take the conviction to be contrary to the evidence presented.

Ministers Luís Roberto Barroso and Alexandre de Moraes felt that the first and second instances had sentenced the man because he had been recognized by his wife and mother and that the statements were consistent.

According to the lawsuit filed on May 14, 2008 in Lajeado (RS), Israel Pacheco entered the victim's home with a knife, raped her and stole her property. After being recognized by the victim and a witness, the woman's mother, Israel claimed to be the only one to have invaded the property. Later, Jacson Luis Silva was included as a flight participant and convicted for theft.

The Public Defender argued that there was an error of law because the genetic material – blood drawn from a quilt – discovered at the crime scene did not belong to Israel Pacheco, the man found guilty of rape, but to Jacson Silva.

Israel Pacheco was sentenced at first instance to 13 years and 9 months of imprisonment, but the sentence fell to 11 years and 6 months in the second instance. Despite the divergence of sentences, the second instance of justice understood that the word of the victim took precedence over the DNA badysis.

In badyzing the question, the rapporteur, Marco Aurélio, motivated the office of the public defender. For him, although the words of the victim in badual crimes show a "strong probative value", this can not prevail over the conclusion of the technical test.