A Vilnius lady who has lived with foreign money for many years: you are to blame for that

Sentenced for the third time for crimes, S. Gaidukevičienė will have to spend four years and six months in the Panevėžys Correctional Facility, and is also required to pay a fine of more than 1.5 thousand euros to the state budget. The three-judge panel of the Vilnius Regional Court ruled in this way, satisfying the complaints of the Vilnius Regional Prosecutor’s Office and a man who had been seriously injured by the scammer, disagreeing with the lower court’s decision: the district court had released The execution of the custodial sentence was postponed for Gaidukevičienė.

“Now S. Gaidukevičienė has been convicted of the deception of ten people, and in a previous conviction it was established that the convict had used the deception against 25 people, but did not experience any real impact from the sentences imposed,” said prosecutor Austėja Abromaitienė . – The convict did not compensate the damage caused to the injured people, does not critically evaluate their actions, does not comply with the obligations imposed by the court, does not pay a fine. These circumstances show that the sentences imposed by previous sentences do not achieve the purposes of the sentence, they have absolutely no negative consequences for the convicted person, on the contrary, they feel unpunished. “

“Due to the criminal act committed by S. Gaidukevičienė, I was financially ruined, and the convict not only does not regret the crimes committed, but also completely ignores the law and does not justify the trust expressed in it by the previous convictions.” He lost 6.5 thousand. Eur, which was paid to S. Gaidukevičienė for the refinance of a bank loan and the deferral of an apartment that was to be sold at auction, but lost not only money but also homes.

According to the case data, it was established that in 2014-2017. S. Gaidukevičienė had concluded agreements with several people who had nothing to do with reality, for which he received more than 35 thousand of the ten victims. EUR. For this money, she promised what she could not do: she promised a man to recover more than 400 thousand. Debt in euros, for which he paid more than 1.3 thousand. EUR. The woman promised to help other people implement investment projects, obtain financing, refinance loans and also promised the support of funds from the European Union.

S. Gaidukevičienė affected not only individuals, who were in a desperate situation due to their debts and tried to preserve their real estate at all costs, but also entrepreneurs representing the companies they managed. In entering into contracts with them, the woman falsified documents: she introduced herself as a company representative and signed contracts for the director, and misappropriated the money received by the order without complying with contractual obligations.

“She lived at the expense of strangers; she convinced everyone that she would help solve problems, although in reality it only caused even more problems,” said a man who had suffered from S. Gaidukevičienė.

But even when it came to getting the police’s attention, the scammer did not calm down: He lied to the victims that he would return the money, even though he did not even intend to.

“During the criminal proceedings, S. Gaidukevičienė met with me and admitted that he had hurt me. Once again, he persuasively promised to count the money with his lawyer, said that other victims are being consulted and promised to contact them again, but the promises are not. were met. The property damage was not compensated not only by me, but also by other victims, “said the man who suffered the scam.

He added that S. Gaidukevičienė “does not even intend to compensate the property damage caused to the victims, because according to previous convictions, none of the victims has been compensated for the damage.”

And in a previously examined criminal case, S. Gaidukevičienė was convicted of fraud, when up to 25 people were affected by his fraud scheme; At the time, a woman who ran a translation company offered unemployed people who dreamed of emigrating from Lithuania. To find a job, they gave away not only the last savings, but even the borrowed money.

The most painful thing was for those who were sent abroad: no one was waiting for them abroad, they didn’t get any jobs, they were forced to sleep in hotels or squat somewhere in the corners for their money, and then exhausted to back home. But even then, they did not get back the money they had paid to the director of the translation agency: the victims had been fed promises for a long time, and some were even told that it was not worth asking the police for help because they were bribed.

The court has found that S. Gaidukevičienė acquired more than 11.3 thousand. Eur, although not only had the right to provide employment services abroad, but also real opportunities to employ people.

“By promising employment and related travel and accommodation services, S. Gaidukevičienė misled the victims,” ​​the court has stated. – The content of the deception used by the perpetrator is confirmed by the obvious facts that some of the victims went abroad without working there, many victims did not leave Lithuania at all, who managed to keep in touch with S. Gaidukevičienė promised to go to work in The near future. completely finished. “

According to the case file, it was discovered that a translation company based in the center of the capital had placed advertisements on various advertising portals to offer work abroad. However, it was silent that for free, the unemployed who went to the agency learned that they would have to sign an advisory contract and pay the amount indicated by the director for the job search, from 230 to 600 euros. The director probably said the amount to be paid “out of sight” because official rates were not even set.

The victims, who lived in Telšiai, Vilnius, Jonava, Kelmė, Šilalė, Kretinga, Vilnius and Kaunas, told officials that they were promised a well-paid job abroad in construction and construction at the company’s facilities in Vilnius, Upės St .. Some victims admitted that they knew that the company was involved in illegal employment abroad, that they were unlicensed, but that they allegedly trusted S. Gaidukevičienė. However, they later regretted it, leaving them jobless or penniless.

A man, who paid around 600 euros for a job in Germany, told officials that when he was looking for work online, he found an ad: when he went to speak, he learned that he might be leaving with the brigade in the near future, just bring the money.

“I said that I would consult with the family, and the next time I came to the company with the money, the director said that he would have to sign a contract called a ‘consulting contract,'” the man said. – I said that this agreement is void, but S. Gaidukevičienė opposed me: that it is a very serious agreement here, the company in Germany is also very serious, and everything here is very serious. She said this agreement is just a formality, it is necessary until I leave Lithuania, and a completely different agreement will be concluded in Germany. “

The man signed the contract and went to the Job Board, where he had registered: “I left the bag, they stopped paying me unemployment benefits. I kept calling S. Gaidukevičienė to find out when I was going to Germany, but she said tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. It lasted two weeks. She no longer answered calls later. “

According to her husband, one night around 11 p.m., S. Gaidukevičienė suddenly called him and told him that he had to go to the company office with his belongings immediately.

“I came, there were a few other people, he told us we were going to Dresden,” said the victim. – When we were finally in Germany and went to the house where we had to meet, we faced the first obstacles: nobody was waiting for us. We were waiting for someone to come when we unexpectedly met the Lithuanians: they had also been sent to Germany by the same company. They explained that they were working, but no one had been paying them for more than two weeks. “

According to the victim, the compatriots offered to call a mediator named Erik, perhaps he knows what.

“He gave an address and told us to go, but there another person received us and declared that we had to pay for the accommodation,” said the victim. – This surprised us a lot, because S. Gaidukevičienė had said that we would not have to pay a penny. We suspected that something was wrong and asked for accommodation with Lithuanians. Seeing the inhumane conditions in which they worked, we decided to return to Lithuania. “

After returning to Vilnius, the man went to S. Gaidukevičienė: “She entered into a confidentiality agreement and told him to sign it. He said that only then would the money be returned and that he would not have to tell anyone what he had seen and experienced “

The man said the money had been promised to be returned within 12 days, but that it had not been returned.

“I kept calling her, telling her that I would write a statement to the police and that I would not leave everything there. Then she transferred part of the money to the account, gave me part of the money, but not the full amount,” said the victim S. Gaidukevičienė stated that there was more money. He will not return, and if he goes to court, it is still a case of disaster.

Similar stories were told by other victims.

S. Gaidukevičienė was fined 40 MGL (1,506 euros) and sentenced to three years in prison for fraudulently attracting foreign money, but his execution was postponed for the same period. The court ruled that during the deferral of the sentence, the convicted person must work or be registered in the job exchange and not leave the city of residence without the permission of the institution that supervises the convicted person and compensate the victims for al minus half the sentence.

However, this sentence was not even enforced, since at that time another criminal case was pending in court, in which ten people were injured against S. Gaidukevičienė. The Vilnius City District Court, which found the woman guilty of crimes, again refused to isolate the scammer from society: who has a permanent place of residence, obtained higher education, works, is married, is middle-aged old and have health problems.

Such a court position enraged not only the prosecutor’s office defending the public interest, but also the man S. Gaidukevičienė had painfully deceived.

“Such circumstances did not prevent S. Gaidukevičienė from committing fraud and other criminal acts for a long period of time,” the victim is convinced that the circumstances specified by the district court do not make her actions less dangerous. – The purpose of the punishment provided for in the criminal law (detaining a person for committing crimes, punishing a person for crimes already committed, depriving them of the possibility of committing new crimes, influencing the offender to comply with the law and not commit more crimes) will not be accomplished without actual imprisonment S. Gaidukevičienė has already been convicted twice for committing similar crimes, and continues to commit similar criminal offenses not only in this case, but, to the best of my knowledge, further investigations have been initiated prior to judgment against her. This shows that Ms Gaidukevičienė tends to commit crimes, not to respect the law, to ignore punishments and punitive measures imposed by the court and other obligations, and at the same time feel unpunished. “

The victim’s position was supported by A. Abromaitien Vil, a prosecutor from the Vilnius Regional Prosecutor’s Office who supported the state prosecution in the criminal case, noting that the district court had incorrectly applied criminal law and incorrectly imposed the final sentence because it did not reconcile the sentence with the previous sentence. As a result, in the prosecutor’s opinion, the institution of postponement of the execution of the sentence was applied without reason.

“It is a defective practice when, in the case of a suspended sentence that has been suspended, another sentence is imposed, the execution of which is also suspended and two separate sentences will be executed at the same time,” the prosecutor emphasized. – Now S. Gaidukevičienė has been convicted of fraud for 10 people, in a previous conviction it was established that the convicted person had used fraud against 25 people, but did not experience any real impact of the sentences imposed. The convict did not compensate the damage caused to the victims, does not critically evaluate their actions, does not comply with the obligations imposed by the court, does not pay a fine. These circumstances show that the sentences imposed by previous sentences do not achieve the purposes of the sentence, they have absolutely no negative consequences for the convicted person, on the contrary, they feel unpunished. “

According to the prosecutor, the suspension of the sentence is a judicial law applicable only in exceptional cases, with due justification that the objectives of the sentence would be achieved without the actual execution of the custodial sentence.

“In this case, the court of first instance postponed the execution of the sentence imposed only on the basis of formal criteria (age, place of residence, marital status, illness), the existence of which did not prevent the accused from committing crimes,” said A Abromaitienė on appeal. “The convict’s personality and previous convictions show a tendency to ignore accepted social norms in society, to behave outside the law, are prone to crime, and have chosen a criminal lifestyle, do not draw appropriate conclusions, and do not change their behavior”.

The prosecutor believes that justice could not be achieved without imprisoning S. Gaidukevičienė.

“Not imposing a custodial sentence on a convicted person who has committed crimes against ten people in this case would create an environment of impunity, lack of respect for criminal law, which would fundamentally deny the essence and purpose of criminal law,” he emphasized. The prosecutor.

The Vilnius Regional Court, after examining the case on appeal, declared that the complaints of the prosecutor and the victim were justified: S. Gaidukevičienė must be sent to serve a real prison sentence, otherwise justice would not be done in the criminal case .

„S. Gaidukevičienė committed up to 15 criminal offenses, which were characterized by a certain fraud mechanism, i. and. The crimes were not committed spontaneously, they were not accidental and were prepared in advance, said the panel of judges made up of judges Laureta Ulbienė, Paulius Veršekys and Nijolė Žimkienė. – From the period of the offenses (the offenses were committed for approximately three years) and the previous convictions, it can be reasonably assumed that such criminal behavior was a type of lifestyle chosen by the convicted person and the easiest way to obtain money without evaluating and noticing other people. “

According to the judges, Ms. Gaidukevičienė’s “indifference and blame” for the crimes committed is confirmed in her position throughout the proceedings: Gaidukevičienė did not admit her guilt for committing criminal acts, did not sincerely repent of her illegal behavior, and for the explanations she gives, it can be understood that it is not her, but the victims themselves who are to blame for their lost money. “

Furthermore, the judges emphasized the importance of the fact that the damage to property caused by criminal acts is very great: more than 35 thousand. Eur, which is still unpaid.

“The crimes were committed in part through the victims’ financial problems, making their crimes more cynical and immoral,” the panel emphasized that the imposition of an actual prison sentence against Ms. Gaidukevičienė would not only be in accordance with the principles of reasonableness, proportionality and fairness. and it will not be too severe for the seriousness of the crimes committed and the actual damage done to the victims.

According to the judges, the circumstances indicated by the district court in which the execution of the sentence of the convicted fraudster was postponed are not exceptional: they are “typical of the majority of Lithuanian citizens”.

“Fraud and deceit are the chosen way of life of a person sentenced to enrich himself illegally by taking advantage of other people’s trust and financial or other problems they have, taking advantage of their vulnerability,” the court noted. eliminate the negative consequences of your criminal actions with minimal and symbolic contributions.

“Postponing real imprisonment for S. Gaidukevičienė can create an imaginary feeling of impunity, having no positive repressive effect on her actions and lifestyle change, which may lead her to continue to commit similar crimes in the future without critically evaluating and perceiving them as a primary source of livelihood. ” and receiving new income, “declared the court, in order to protect the public from the dangerous behavior of the convicted person and avoid possible new crimes, only the actual execution of the prison would fulfill the objectives of the sentence and apply the principle of justice .

The judges noted that S. Gaidukevičienė will be sent to serve the prison as soon as officials stop it.