Two brothers claimed that they killed their brother-in-law with 16 shots to avenge their sister, who was a victim of physical and psychological abuse, as well as other family members. The argument was accepted by the Santa Catarina court, which commuted the sentences of those convicted.

The brothers ambushed their son-in-law on Palmas beach in the province of Governor Celso Ramos – Photo: PMGCR/disclosure/ND

A man was killed on Palmas beach in the governorate of Celso Ramos in November 2016.

According to the trial, armed with .38-caliber weapons, the brothers walked along the trail and, hiding in the woods, waited for their son-in-law to pass by the beach. Around 10 a.m., the man was shot 16 times while passing the trail.

The dead man raped a woman, attacked his father-in-law and threatened his mother-in-law

At that time, the brothers were found guilty of murder with the classification of ambush and low motive. This is because, according to Santa Catarina justice, they would have acted out of revenge.

According to the lawsuit, the day before the murder, the son-in-law attacked his father-in-law with a machete.

According to the 2nd Criminal Chamber of the STO (Santa Catarina Court), all the witnesses interviewed confirmed that the sister was the victim of the deceased, with whom she had been in a relationship for three years.

According to the lawsuit, the sister was subjected to constant physical, mental, sexual and psychological attacks. The situation allegedly escalated into death threats against the wife’s family after her mother advised her to break up with the man.

The sister of the convicts had to register a police report (incident report) to report the death threats.

The court accepted the brothers’ acquittals and commuted the sentence

The Second Criminal Chamber unanimously accepted the brothers’ arguments and removed one of the signs of murder – an unseemly motive.

“In this case, while it cannot be denied that the crime was committed out of revenge, it cannot also be forgotten that the underlying motive is not heinous, heinous, reprehensible, since, as repeatedly stated in the instructions, the appellants were responding to the context of domestic violence committed by the victim against his sister, and, finally, an episode of physical aggression (with machete blows) and humiliation towards his father,” one of the voters emphasized.

According to TAO, the classification of the ambush has been maintained. The offense of unlawful possession of a firearm was also excluded from the sentence as no specific complaint was made for this offense outside the context of murder.

The argument was considered by the 2nd Criminal Chamber of the TAT – Photo: Flavio Junior/TAO/Divulgação/ND