- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-12-09Sentence Date : 2007-10-23
It was retained that in the period 2002-2003, the defendant perpetrated on French territory the crime of aggravated pandering, obtaining profit from the prostitution of several persons. He was also accused of recruiting by use of fraud or violence various persons that he transported and harboured in Spain and France with the aim of sexually exploiting them.
In the period February – June 2002, the defendant perpetrated in Spain the crime of human trafficking in relation to victim C.A.M. from which he obtained the sum of EUR 40,000.Show more
- ROU02658 2009
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-12-11Sentence Date : 2009-03-18
In 2003, H.E.S. proposed to the victim H.B.E. to go to Spain in order to work as a maid, deceiving her that he has friends in Spain who can help her find a job. After two days, H.E.S. came at the victim’s house together with the defendant and her concubine, assuring the victim that she will find a job in Spain. They accompanied her to another city, where she obtained a passport, and after that they all went to a different town where the victim was accommodated at the defendant’s mother. On 11 June 2003, the victim was sent to Spain with a transport company, while the driver took her passport and gave it back to her only at the moment of crossing the border. Once in Spain, she was accommodated to the house of the defendant and forced to practice prostitution.
The same means of action was used by the defendant in relation to the victim E.E., who was deceived that she will find a job in agriculture in Spain. When the victim arrived in Spain, she was accommodated to the house of the defendant and was forced to practice prostitution for 3 months, while she was permanently accompanied and supervised by the defendant, who also took the money received by the victim.
As concerns the third victim, she was recruited in the same way as the other two, but after obtaining the passport for Spain the victim found out about what will happen in Spain and she managed to escape from the location she was transported to.Show more
- ROUx002Operation EUROPA
- Show more
- ROU02846 - 2008
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-03-14Sentence Date : 2007-09-25
The defendants EM and IG (concubines), IJN (brother of IG) and IU (married) and JG established the basis of a criminal organized group, later joined by the defendants SH, NG, EJD, and HJ.
The defendants recruited young women, the majority of which were from destitute rural backgrounds within the county of Bacau, usually between the ages of 18-20 (a small proportion of the victims were, however, minors between the ages of 14-18) through the promise of employment abroad. Negotiations were held from Romania with Albanian and Romanian nationals in Italy with respect to the price and other arrangements.
Once the victims were convinced of the defendants’ intention to provide them employment abroad, the defendants obtained travel documents for the victims. The victims were subsequently taken to Italy. Usually, the defendants EM IG and IJN handled the financial aspects of the transportation and the obtaining of the travel documents.
Once in Italy (the unnamed city of U) the victims were sold to Albanian or Romanian nationals.
SH, NG and EJD were mainly involved in the transportation of the victims whereas HJ was mainly involved in recruitment of the victims in the initial stage of the deception.
The courts held that in the overwhelming majority, the victims realized the real nature of their situation only when they reached the destination.
Once in Italy, they were transferred to other Romanian nationals or Albanian nationals and coerced, through intimidation, threats (both real as well as inoculated) and the use of physical violence against them, to practice street-level prostitution. They were supervised by the persons who had, in lay terms, “purchased” them from the defendants.
In some cases the victims returned to Romania and, under subsequent threats against themselves and their families, received from the defendants (mainly the heads of the organization) returned to practice prostitution in Italy.
The victims were forced to relinquish all of the amounts earned to their procurers (panderers) and to the traffickers (the defendants).Show more
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2010-04-19Sentence Date : 2008-04-19
The defendant met the victims (3 minor females) in a county neighbour to that of their domicile and following discussions, he proposed them to go to Italy as dancers in a bar that he owned. The victims went to the defendant’s domicile where the latter took their identity documentation (id cards and birth certificates) and told them that the sole solution for them to be able to travel to Italy was to enter into marriages of convenience in order to obtain travel documents (passports). The victims were minors so they could not obtain their passports and leave the country without having their parents’ consent, but by virtue of marriage they would not require such consent anymore. The defendant obtained the victims’ consent for the completion of their marriages with 3 young men paid by the defendant in order to accept the marriages, and after the completion of the civil marriages he completed the formalities for the issuance of the victims’ new identity cards.
Meanwhile, the victims were reported missing by their parents and the police begun an ex officio investigation against the defendant suspecting that he may be involved in juvenile female trafficking, the minors being transported to Italy and forced to practice prostitution.
The police found the minors at the defendant’s domicile during their investigation.Show more
- RomaniaSentence Date : 2009-10-28
The victim gave her consent to going to Spain in order to work in a restaurant. The defendants took advantage of her financial situation and offer to help her obtaining the passport, that was held by the defendants. The defendants also bought her plane ticket. When arriving in Spain with G.S.D., the victim was forced into practicing prostitution and gained approximately EUR 8,000, that were taken by G.S.D., who gave EUR 3,000 to the other two defendants for recruiting the victim and kept the difference for herself. The victim repeatedly asked G.S.D. to let her go home, but the defendant let her come back to Romania only after a month. When she arrived in Romania, the victim filed criminal complaint against the defendants and reported what happened.
The first Court convicted the defendants for human trafficking, and the appellate Court maintained the convictions although retaining mitigating circumstances. Separately, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the decision to the appellate court on several substantive and procedural grounds.Show more
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-11-21Sentence Date : 2007-12-18
After its last detention, defendant adhered to a criminal group specialized in human trafficking on both the Romanian and Italian territories.
In June 2004, victim B.E., age 17, was recruited by defendant N.G. and another person (D.C. – investigated in another case) and transported to Padua, Italy, where she was sexually exploited for the benefit of the defendant and D.C, although the victim was promised that she would benefit from a part of the obtained revenues. Subsequently, the victim was sold to a Romanian citizen for the amount of EUR 1500.
In November 2004, N.G. proposed victim P.A.I. (with whom the defendant previously had romantic relationships) going to Torino, Italy, in order to practice prostitution. The victim was sexually exploited until January 2005.
In September 2005, victim F.M., 19 years old, met female defendant P.D.I who promised she would help her find a job in Italy as a nurse for an old lady. The victim agreed and was transported to Italy where she was handed over to defendants N.G. and H.S. who forced her to practice prostitution. The victim managed to escape by confessing that she was kept against her will to her third client. This client brought the victim to the Italian police, and following the statements made by the victim to the police, the two defendants were caught.
Also, in September 2005, victim M.I. met defendant H.S. who promised her a job. This victim was also taken to Italy, kept in the same location as victim F.M. and forced to prostitute.Show more
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-05-21Sentence Date : 2007-03-12
In 2004, victim U.E. (19 years old) was recruited by defendant C.S. who promised to help her get a job in Italy as a bartender or waiter. The defendant also offered to support the fees related to the travel documentation. On her arrival in Italy, the victim was forced to prostitute for a couple of months until, with the help of an Italian client, she obtained the promise that she would be transported back to Romania.
Victim A.A. (25 years) attended together with her boyfriend the birthday party of defendant T.C.E. Defendant C.V. also attended this party, occasion on which he was introduced to the victim and offered to help her find a job at a club in Italy. He also offered to help the victim pay her debts before leaving the country and support the fees concerning the travel documentation and the transport to Italy. Once in Italy, the victim was forced to prostitute in order to pay her debts to the defendant. Two months later, she returned to Romania with the help of a Romanian client.
Victim L.N and her sister were approached in a bar by defendant T.C.E. who invited them to a party taking place at her place the next day. The defendant, aware of their indigent family background, presented them the possibility of going to Holland in order to work at a bar, and even told them about possibly having to prostitute in order to obtain significant revenues.
Only the victim L.N. accepted the proposal and she was for a period harboured in the defendant’s apartment, and subsequently transferred to Iasi where she had intercourse with several men in a hotel in exchange of money. While in the defendant’ apartment, the victim met defendants C.S. and C.V. who convinced her to forget about Holland and go with them to Italy. The victim accepted their proposal, but she was prevented from leaving the country at the border point by a police patrol.
Witness depositions and wiretapped phone calls showed that the defendants’ criminal activity was more extensive, but there were difficulties in proving such due to the fact it took place mainly abroad.
With the exception of defendant T.C.E., who during prosecution admitted, at least partially, having committed the charged acts, the other two defendants constantly denied having committed any criminal act.
During the trial, neither defendant C.S. nor defendant T.C.E. admitted having committed any of the charged acts, and shortly after her deposition, the defendant disappeared.
Defendant C.V. also disappeared and he has not yet been tracked down.
During the trial, a part of the witnesses changed their initial statements which can only be explained by the pressure exercised on them by the interested parties.Show more
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-06-20Sentence Date : 2008-06-20
The defendants have recruited several young women, transported them to Germany and promised they will find them jobs. Being in a foreign country and with no means of support, the young women have agreed to have intercourse with different persons appointed by the defendants, who also collected the money from the clients for their benefit. The young women were permanently supervised, some being taken their IDs. Their freedom of movement was restricted and they were subject to different pressures and abuses in order to prostitute.
The Court have seized the following amounts from the defendants:
- EUR 49,100 from A.M.
- EUR 2,000 from R.C.P.
The laws applied were Law no. 678/2001 on preventing and combating human trafficking, the Romanian Criminal Code and the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code.Show more
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-09-23Sentence Date : 2008-09-23
The defendant was put under the charge of juvenile trafficking by the Public Prosecutor. The Public Prosecutor argued that the defendant forced the victim (underage woman) to hold intercourse with him and with different other men, pretending to recover EUR 1,000 which he supposedly lend to the victim’s mother. The victim argued that she was taken against her will at the defendant’s home, with the consent of her mother, where she was forced to hold intercourse with different men.
The Court decided that the defendant had an insincere attitude, arguing that he has a close friendly relationship with the victim, as the testimonies of several witnesses proved that the victim was taken by the defendant every night to his home, where she was forced to practice prostitution.Show more
Filter Results by:
- ► Country (1)
- ► Decision/Verdict Date (6)
- ► Sentenced Date (7)
- ► Victim's Nationality (1)
- ► Victim's Gender / Child (3)
- ► Defendant's Nationality (3)
- ► Defendant's Gender (2)
- ► Verdict (3)
- ► Appellate Decision (3)
- ► Court (20)
- Alba Court of Appeals (1)
- Alba Iulia Court of Appeals (4)
- Alba Iulia Court of Appeals, Minors and Family Division (1)
- Bacău Court of Appeals (1)
- Brașov Court of Appeals (4)
- Cluj Court of Appeals (2)
- Court of Appeal Bacau (1)
- Craiova Court of Appeals (4)
- Craiova Court of Appeals, Minors and Family Division (1)
- Curtea de Apel Iasi (1)
- Curtea de Apel Ploiesti (1)
- Curtea de Apel Timisoara (1)
- Galati Court of Appeals, Penal Division (1)
- High Court of Cassation (1)
- High Court of Cassation and Justice (12)
- Iasi Court of Appeals (1)
- Pitesti Court of Appeals (1)
- Ploiesti Court of Appeals (3)
- Supreme Court of Justice (12)
- Timisoara Court of Appeals (1)
- ► Legal System (1)
- ► Latest Court Ruling (2)
- ► Type of Court/Tribunal (1)
- ► Keyword (28)
- Abduction (7)
- Abuse of power or a position of vulnerability (26)
- Agriculture (1)
- Article 3, Trafficking in Persons Protocol (22)
- Article 5, Trafficking in Persons Protocol (22)
- Article 6 UNTOC (1)
- Begging (13)
- Commercial sexual exploitation (42)
- Deception (39)
- Domestic servitude (2)
- Exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation (45)
- Forced labour or services (10)
- Fraud (15)
- Giving or receiving payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person (5)
- Harbouring (30)
- Hotel/Restaurant/Bar (1)
- Internal (16)
- Mutual legal assistance (3)
- Organized Criminal Group (9)
- Other (3)
- Other sectors (1)
- Receipt (14)
- Recruitment (51)
- Servitude (5)
- Threat or use of force or other forms of coercion (42)
- Transfer (19)
- Transnational (40)
- Transportation (44)