However, the court ordered the acquitted person to pay the costs of the lawyer from the state – 7.4 thousand. euros.
According to the court, it was only after the initiation of the pre-trial investigation that it was possible to verify the facts by the means established by law.
The court also found that the tax administrator, who performed the tax audit of Mr. Kozubovski’s income, did not commit any illegal actions, and the purpose of the criminal proceedings is to verify the suspicion.
Summarizing the factual circumstances and the totality of the evidence in the case and in the materials of the connected criminal case, the court has reason to state that the pre-trial investigation against the plaintiff was started in the presence of sufficient data, which allows us to assume that a criminal act may have been committed, and such data was sufficient for a procedural decision on the pre-trial to accept the initiation of the investigation”, announced Diana Jankienė, judge of the district court of the city of Vilnius.
The pre-trial investigation was conducted due to illegal enrichment and illegal translation of economic, commercial, financial or professional activities.
The court also found that the pre-trial investigation was reasonably and legally resumed and continued, and the acquittal does not negate the legality of the actions of state institutions and officials.
window.fbAsyncInit = function() {
FB.init({
appId: ‘117218911630016’,
version: ‘v2.10’,
status: true,
cookie: false,
xfbml: true
});
};
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) {
return;
}
js = d.createElement(s);
js.id = id;
js.src = “https://connect.facebook.net/lt_LT/sdk.js”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
#famous #lawyer #Kozubovskis #failed #prove #case #started #grounds
**Interview with Jane Smith, Legal Analyst and Expert on Judicial Proceedings**
**Editor**: Thank you for joining us today, Jane. We recently learned that a court has acquitted an individual but still required them to pay the costs of the state-appointed lawyer. Can you help us understand the implications of such a decision?
**Jane Smith**: Absolutely, and thank you for having me. In this case, while the defendant was found not guilty, the ruling to impose legal costs indicates that the court recognized the need for the state to be compensated for the public resources utilized during the trial. This is not uncommon, especially in cases involving complex investigations.
**Editor**: The court mentioned that it was only after the pre-trial investigation that they were able to verify the facts. What does this say about the due process in legal proceedings?
**Jane Smith**: It underscores the importance of thorough pre-trial investigations. It suggests that the veracity of evidence can only be established through rigorous processes defined by law. This is crucial for ensuring that courts can make informed decisions based on solid and verified information.
**Editor**: Lastly, the mention of a tax administrator performing an audit raises questions about the connection between tax audits and criminal investigations. Can you clarify that relationship?
**Jane Smith**: Certainly. Tax audits can sometimes overlap with criminal investigations, especially if discrepancies are found that suggest fraudulent activity. The role of the tax administrator is to assess compliance with tax laws, and their findings can be pivotal in legal proceedings, often serving as a basis for further investigation or charges.
**Editor**: Thank you, Jane, for your insights on this complex situation. We appreciate your time.
**Jane Smith**: My pleasure! Thank you for bringing attention to such an important topic.
