In relation to defendant 2, it was claimed that her personal circumstances are particularly difficult as she is the mother of a child with special needs. Sending her to prison behind bars will leave her three children, especially minor A and minor Z, without a mother and no response to their distress. It was claimed that defendant 2 serves as the dominant parent of her minor children, accompanies them to the medical treatments, and it is not possible to think of the possibility that they will be left without her. The defense attorney asked to adopt the recommendation of the Probation Service in the case of defendant 2 as well, to choose a rehabilitative punishment and to make do with community service.
It should be noted that the defense did not refer to case law to support its claiMs.
- Since the defense attorney objected to the forfeiture of the seized funds and claimed that they belonged to others, counsel for the parties agreed that the issue of forfeiture would be discussed separately and after the sentence was rendered.
- Defendant 1 She said she made a mistake, pays for it, and understands that by her actions she caused injustice to people and to herself. According to her, a new path has begun and has rehabilitated itself. The defendant added that her detention behind bars, although brief, hurt her and makes it difficult for her to think about the possibility that she will return to prison.
- Defendant 2 She said she had made a mistake, ready to take responsibility but not willing to bear the mistake of others. According to her, she was part of a group of about 30 people and did not understand why only she and Defendant 1 were prosecuted.
Defendant 2 added that during the (10) days during which she was detained behind bars and during the period of house arrest (one month), her children did not go to school. It was claimed that her son with special needs understood only her and that she must continue to accompany him in his care. The defendant added that her daughter needed a lot of care and began to cry.