It was the ninth sentence for the 40-year-old man. The lawyer-educated man from Vilnius faces a tenth conviction if the prosecutor’s office proves him guilty of possible espionage for Belarus – the prosecutor’s office submitted this case to the court last week.
On Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the Vilnius District Court examined M. Danieliaus’s appeal regarding the conviction for the production and use of fake documents. The crimes were committed in 2014-2015.
M. Danielius is arrested in the case of possible espionage for Belarus, he was not brought to the hearing of his complaint in the Vilnius District Court because he was not informed about the hearing in time. The lawyer of the convicted person said that the client wants to participate in the consideration of his appeal, but the judges decided to hear the case without the appellant, because he is represented by a lawyer, and the examination of evidence is not requested.
While in Kaunas prison, M. Danielius wrote a complaint to change the sentence announced to him in May for falsification of documents – in his opinion, the case should be closed due to the statute of limitations and a pre-trial investigation should be started for the two businessmen who have the status of witnesses in the case. The lawyer representing Mr. Daniel asked to meet the requirements of the complaint.
At that time, the prosecutor of the Vilnius District Prosecutor’s Office, Valerijus Sevostjanov, said that the sentence for Mr. Daniel should remain unchanged.
M. Danielius admitted his guilt for all 13 acts charged against him and agreed with the conclusions of specialists in the case, which recorded which documents he forged and used.
“He was accused of 13 criminal acts, he testified in court, he refused during the pre-trial investigation. The prosecutor asked to be classified as continuous crimes, instead of 13. The court sentenced him for five acts, instead of 13. He made a legal and reasonable decision, there is no reason to cancel it. The court took into account all the judgments, the statute of limitations expires only in May 2024. There was no reason to terminate the case due to the statute of limitations. The case has been examined within the limits of the indictment,” said the prosecutor.
The Vilnius District Court will announce its verdict on October 17.
The court did not consider the statute of limitations
In the sentence announced to M. Daniel by the District Court of Vilnius City, it is written that if he had committed only the one criminal act for which he is accused in this criminal case, the statute of limitations for the adoption of a guilty verdict would have expired on March 28, 2023.
“However, he has been convicted by the valid judgments of the District Court of Vilnius City in 2018. March 26 and 2020 January 21 by the verdicts, thus he is recognized as having committed the criminal acts specified in these verdicts,” the verdict reads.
In the last sentence announced on January 21, 2020, M. Danielius was convicted of fraudulent financial accounting management and/or organization and one more forgery of a document or possession of a forged document.
According to the court, the verdict stated that he used known fake and forged documents on May 9, 2016.
“Thus, according to MD’s conviction data, part 8 of Article 95 of the Criminal Code, the statute of limitations for his guilty verdict in this case extended until 2024. May 9 Consequently, the statute of limitations for the adoption of a guilty verdict has not expired as of the day of the verdict, according to the charges brought by the MD in this criminal case,” the District Court of Vilnius City announced.
M. Danielius was previously convicted eight times in total, before this sentence, including for forgery of documents, false complaint or reporting of a crime that did not exist, kidnapping of a seal, seal or document or use of a kidnapper.
The courts have repeatedly sentenced Mr. Daniel to a suspended prison sentence, as well as imposed fines, contributions to the fund for victims of crimes and the obligation not to leave the city limits of the place of residence without the permission of the institution supervising the convict.
Did being a recidivist
In December 2015, the district court of the city of Vilnius also sentenced him to imprisonment, with its execution suspended, in this case there were 19 episodes of forgery of documents, as well as incriminating abduction of a seal, stamp or document or use of the abductor, fraud.
The court verdict states that before committing the criminal acts described in this criminal case, the man was convicted three times, after committing these acts he was convicted five times, the convictions have not been canceled and have not disappeared.
“Taking into account the fact that MD committed the criminal acts in question while being convicted more than once for committing similar criminal acts, the court recognizes as an aggravating circumstance the fact that he committed the criminal act as a recidivist”, the court verdict reads.
M. Danielius told the court that unprofitable companies are formally transferred (sold) to antisocial persons in order to avoid creditors.
According to M. Danieliaus, T. and VV, who have the status of witnesses in this case, and whom he helped to “get rid of” UAB “M” had such a goal.
“They paid for such a ‘service’ by contacting the police,” M. Danielius told the court. He did not deny that he helped the witness AV to give up the leadership of UAB “S” and used DG’s data as a cover for that, acting on his behalf and signing on his behalf in the documents specified in the indictment.
M. Danielius admitted his guilt for all 13 acts charged against him and agreed with the conclusions of specialists in the case, which recorded which documents he forged and used. The man from Vilnius said that more than eight years have passed since the incriminated acts, of which he is accused, it is difficult for him to remember all the circumstances of the events that took place at that time.
In the criminal case, M. Daniel was charged with the production of fake documents and their use related to the alleged decisions that the director, not the board, acts on behalf of the company “S”, the alleged decision that the director of the company “S” is the DG, and the company “S’s shareholder’s company” The name of K” was changed to “D”, etc. – the incriminated criminal acts are related to four legal entities, changes to the managers, management bodies, statutes, places of registration of offices, types of their activities and shareholders of these legal entities.
Forged documents were submitted to the Registry Center.
During the hearing in the district court, the family of entrepreneurs said that they decided to sell the business and leave for Spain. They found an advertisement on the Internet that M. Danielius was buying companies, and they sold their company to G. Daniel, who was acting under a power of attorney, for one euro. Later, after an examination, it turned out that the power of attorney was forged.
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’));
#Mantas #Danielius #accused #espionage #annulment #sentence #falsifying #documents
**Interview with Legal Expert on the Recent Conviction of M. Danielius**
**Interviewer:** Today, we have with us legal expert and criminal justice analyst, Dr. Ingrida Lankauskienė. We are here to discuss the recent developments in the case of M. Danielius, who has been convicted for multiple offenses, including the production and use of fake documents. Thank you for joining us, Dr. Lankauskienė.
**Dr. Lankauskienė:** Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to be here.
**Interviewer:** To start off, could you give us a brief overview of M. Danielius’s legal situation and his history of convictions?
**Dr. Lankauskienė:** Certainly. M. Danielius is a 40-year-old man from Vilnius who has a long history of criminal activity. As of now, he has been convicted eight times, with charges including forgery of documents and fraudulent activities. Recently, he faced his ninth conviction related to the use of falsified documents, which dates back to crimes committed between 2014 and 2015. He’s now also facing potential charges of espionage for Belarus.
**Interviewer:** That’s quite a significant history. How does his past affect this current case, particularly in relation to the sentencing?
**Dr. Lankauskienė:** His past convictions play a crucial role in how the current case is treated. The court considers recidivism as an aggravating factor, which can lead to harsher sentences. In Danielius’s case, the judges recognized that he committed these new offenses while under previous convictions, thus impacting their ruling. The court found that despite the statute of limitations for some charges, the ongoing nature of his criminal behavior justified the current proceedings.
**Interviewer:** There was mention of the possibility of espionage charges. How significant is that compared to his previous convictions?
**Dr. Lankauskienė:** Espionage operates on a different level of severity than forgery or fraud. If found guilty of espionage, the implications would be much more serious, potentially involving national security concerns. This aspect of his case elevates its significance and highlights a troubling pattern of behavior. The prosecutor’s office is now under pressure to prove these serious allegations, which could lead to more severe penalties.
**Interviewer:** It was reported that M. Danielius did not attend the hearing of his appeal. How common is it for defendants to be absent from their hearings, and what are the implications?
**Dr. Lankauskienė:** It’s not uncommon, particularly when logistical issues arise, such as notification mishaps. However, being absent from one’s own hearing can be detrimental. It can give the impression that the defendant is not taking the process seriously, potentially influencing the judges. Although his lawyer represented him, a defendant’s presence often plays an important role in how the court perceives their case.
**Interviewer:** What is the expected timeline now for a resolution in this case?
**Dr. Lankauskienė:** The Vilnius District Court is expected to announce its verdict on October 17. The judges will review the evidence presented, alongside Danielius’s previous convictions, before making a decision on both his appeal regarding the previous conviction and any upcoming charges related to espionage.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Dr. Lankauskienė, for your insights into this complex legal situation. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds in the coming weeks.
**Dr. Lankauskienė:** Thank you for having me. It’s crucial for us to stay informed about such cases, as they reflect larger issues within our criminal justice system.
