- 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
- ROU033Case CA Cluj 4 A_2008
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2008-01-15Sentence Date : 2006-12-14
It was established that M.N.M. was E.N.’s daughter and that U.G. was the stepbrother of the latter. Defendant M.N.M spent several years abroad where she illegally practised prostitution. She decided, together with the other defendants, to recruit young women with promises of well paid jobs, and afterwards force them to work as prostitutes.
The women were recruited in Romania and subsequently transported to Spain by defendants E.N. and U.G. Once in Spain, the victims would be sold to defendant M.N.M. who forced them to practise prostitution and also took away all the earnings that resulted from such activity.Show more
- ROU038Case CA Bacau 47-2009
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2009-04-01Sentence Date : 2009-04-21
Between 2002 and 2003 the defendants recruited P.B.N, E.O., E.N., I.F.E., T.J.T., M.N., N.F., V.F.D., N.F.M., Ț.N., Ț (ex D) N., out of whom the first two were under 18. They were tricked into believing that they would be working as housemaids or hostesses. The defendants paid all the expenses necessary in order to take the victims abroad, including transportation and documents. However, once they arrived at their destinations the defendants told them that the actual job involved engaging in prostitution, and that this was the only way in which they could repay their debt. Those who tried to refuse, were coerced into prostitution through physical and verbal abuse. The victims were each forced into prostitution for a period lasting between 1 and 6 months. The money earned from this activity was collected by the defendants, and the victims only received small sums for basic expenses.
Victims M.N. and E.O. were abducted at the same time and forced to work as prostitutes in Spain. E.O. managed to escape helped by her family in Romania who threatened the defendants with reporting them to the authorities, and made them send her back home. Victim M.N., on the other hand, was sold to another pimp and continued to be exploited for 3 more months. Victim T.J.T., together with other three abused women taken to Germany by the defendants, managed to escape after a week of prostitution and managed to find legitimate jobs in the same country. The case file does not contain information on how the other victims managed to escape from the locations where they were forced into prostitution.Show more
- ROU037Case CA Brasov 29-Ap 2009
- RomaniaVerdict Date: 2009-04-29Sentence Date : 2009-05-25
Since 1995, defendant T.Ș.N. travelled to France where he committed a long series of theft and larceny offences. Before the law no. 678/2001 was ratified, he started a network of people recruited from Romania, who would come to France to commit the same type of crimes. From 1999, T.Ș.N. coordinated this network together with the rest of the defendants -G.D.O., T.N.M., T.N. and G.N.E.- by recruiting people with financial difficulties and giving them false identities in order to deceive the French authorities in case they were arrested. They were given instructions in case of arrest and all the income generated by these crimes was administered by the defendants.
In 2002, the defendants recruited 4 minors who, under false identities, were brought to France to commit shoplifting and larceny. The defendants provided them with transportation and false documents in order to bring them to and from France. They also preferred minors in this operation because it was easier to avoid detection by the French authorities: juveniles who commit felonies are taken in a special form of detention in France, from which they were instructed to escape as soon as they were transferred there.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)