The court sentenced all the defendants to fines. 40,000 was allocated to R.Grig. a fine of EUR 30,000 for his son TG. (including the two days spent in custody, the final penalty is a fine of 29,800 euros), lawyer ML – 10,000, lawyer BL – 10,000. (including the two days spent in custody, the final penalty is a fine of 9,800 euros).
The mitigating circumstance for ML and BL is that they confessed and sincerely regretted their actions. The fact that they committed the criminal acts as accomplices was recognized as an aggravating circumstance for all the defendants.
In this case, it was established that out of 2 thousand TG and the lawyer who died during the trial shared 500 euros of the bribe amount, and 1,000 euros. euros were handed over to judge R. Grigis. Therefore, the court decided that this money should be confiscated as a result of criminal acts after the judgment becomes final.
The court established that the bribery of judge R.Grig was initiated by ML, a lawyer working in Kaunas, together with her father, also a lawyer, BL. The latter, using acquaintances, promised to hand over the bribe to judge R.Grig.
Lawyer BL agreed with another Kaunas lawyer (she died during the trial) that this lawyer, together with the son of judge R. Grigo, with whom the law firm had a cooperation agreement, would hand over a bribe to the judge. It was established that the judge took the bribe at his workplace at the time – in the Kaunas Palace of the Kaunas District Court.
The bribe was given in exchange for shortening the term of revocation of a driver’s license from the appointed 12 months to 3 months for the lawyer ML’s defendant in the administrative offense case pending on appeal, and additionally assigning him an administrative sanction – a 1-year ban on driving vehicles that are not equipped with anti-alcohol engine locks.
The defendants ML and BL fully admitted their guilt, the defendants RG and TG denied their guilt. However, the latter’s explanations that the money found with them (from TG – 500 euros, from R. Grigas – 1 thousand euros) are not related to the aspiration to make a favorable decision for the lawyer ML’s defendant in the administrative offense case contradicts the data in the case.
“The fact that ML, BL, TG and R.Grigas have committed the criminal acts charged against them is confirmed by the testimony of witnesses, the explanations of ML and BL, the data recorded in the protocols of actions carried out during the criminal investigation, the protocols of searches and inspections of objects, the conclusion of the specialist of the forensic examination center, others in the case collected and investigated evidence,” noted judge Donatas Jatužis.
The verdict of the Panevėžys District Court can be appealed to the Lithuanian Court of Appeal within 20 days.
