ᑕ❶ᑐ The lawyer who defended Cuca in Switzerland asks them to let the technician work: « He signed up and paid »

Lawyer Luiz Carlos Silveira Martins, better known as Cacalo, who defended Cuca and 3 other players accused of abusing the sexuality of a 13-year-old girl in 1987 in Switzerland, spoke on the case.

In an interview with the Folha de S. Paulo newspaper, Cacalo, who at the time was the legal vice president of the guildwhere the four athletes played, classified the treatment that is given to Cuca today as « every ».

“I am not defending or accusing anyone in the process, justice has already decided, but Cuca can no longer work. He signed up and paid,” he began by saying.

“Now Cuca can’t work anymore because the girls from Corinthians, the girls from whoever, dammit… Everyone who goes on with their lives, leaves the guy. He didn’t run away, he was Does a dude have to have his life turned upside down forever by a mistake? asked the lawyer.

At the time, Cacalo traveled to the country to defend the players and managed to free all four about a month later. Cuca, Henrique Etges, Fernando Castoldi and Eduardo Hamester posted bail, returned to Brazil and, two years later, were tried and sentenced in Switzerland.

The lawyer disagrees with the extent of the repercussion the case has gained since the coach arrived at the Corinthians. The coach could not resist the pressure of the crowd and gave up the position six days later at the request of his family..

According to Cacalo, the crime of sexual harassment had another legal classification in Switzerland and should not be confused with the current understanding of viola in Brazil.

“Times have changed, it’s been 37 years. I can’t even tell you how it would be today, but it was a very different situation back then. Fortunately, we had a favorable result, because the request from the prosecutor’s office was a much heavier penalty for rape,” he said.

Cacalo also pointed out that the coach had a memory lapse when he said he was tried in absentia. According to the lawyer, the process followed standard procedure, with follow-up by Gremio’s legal department.

Last Friday (9), Journal National, from TV Globo, a gift part of the 1023-page court file kept in the State Archives of the Canton of Bern which confirms the presence of Cuca’s sperm on the victim of the rape case.

In his presentation to the Corinthians last week, Cuca said he was innocent, that the victim did not recognize him as one of the rapists and that he did not participate in the sexual act..

Director of the institution, Barbara Studer read the trial in its entirety and explained to TV that the case had been under judicial secrecy for 110 years. She nevertheless agrees to show a page of the document, number 915, which begins the judgment in the case, pronounced by the Criminal Court of Bern on August 15, 1989.

The document lists the names of the four defendants: Alexi Stival (Cuca), Henrique Etges, Eduardo Hamester and Fernando Castoldi, all Gremio players at the time, and indicates that the crimes for which they were tried and sentenced were acts sex with a minor. and coercion. .

In August 1989, during the period of the former players were sentenced, the Swiss newspaper « Der Bund », which covered the trial, published the article in the publication and mentioned that there was Cuca’s sperm in the body of the victim. The report also mentions that the girl attempted suicide after the crime.

“I can say that what is in the article (in the newspaper) is correct. What is really proven is that there was a sexual situation with a minor of thirteen,” Studer said.

Lawyers Daniel Bialski and Ana Beatriz Saguas, who are now defending Coach Cuca, sent a note to GE’s website and to the Jornal Nacional:

« The defense of Cuca considers that the lynching is irresponsible for situations that occurred 34 years ago is regrettable and contrary to the reality of the facts. by several reports of the time. Distortions and speculations will be held civilly and criminally responsible, especially since it is a confidential process, demonstrating the precariousness and inconsistency of any alleged information provided by third parties”.