[ad_1]
In recent years, Romania has been rocked by many terrifying cases, from that of Elodia Ghinescu, to the case of Caracal, that of children killed by dogs or the recent case of the murderer of Radauti, nicknamed “The Woman Eater”. Among all these cases, the folder is the press.
This is because the fourth estate in the state led, in these cases, to draw the attention of the citizenry to the point where the case could not be buried and forgotten, but had to be resolved in one way or another. In the case of Elodia Ghinescu, the greatest merits for the exhibition and, in the end, the solution, lie with her mother, who did not accept to be forgotten, but also Dan Diaconescu (OTV), who covered the case for years. .
The same happened in the case of Caracal, where the fight of the parents of Alexandra Măceşanu and Luiza Melencu, sometimes with windmills, caused this case to remain in the public attention even today. However, the merits of Alexandru Cumpănaşu, a personality with entry to the central authorities, who made enough noise for this case, being directly involved, must also be recognized. Let’s not forget that Alexandra Măceşanu is his niece. The case of Gheorghe Dincă and the alleged crimes (because a body was never found) continues to shake today, a year and a half after its appearance in the media.
Children killed by dogs, the paradox of the area
The power of the press has also been seen in the case of children killed by dogs. In March 2012, in the village of Călineşti Enache, in Suceava, a six-year-old boy died in terrible torment after being bitten all over his body by a dog. But, given the location, the lack of correspondents and additional information, the case was forgotten in the media. Until a year later, when a four-year-old boy, who was playing in the Tei Park area with his brother, under the supervision of his grandmother, was murdered under similar conditions.
“The event was announced at 112 around 12.30, by the grandmother of the two children, who had walked with the little ones in the park.
After a while, the children disappeared from the woman. At one point, the six-year-old boy approached his grandmother, was bitten by dogs and told her that his brother had also been attacked.
The teams that arrived at the scene tried to save the 4-year-old boy, but could only declare his death, “Digi24 wrote in 2013.
We can thus speak of a paradox of proximity, of the area where the tragedy occurred. If in the case of Suceava the coverage was reduced, the same did not happen in the case of Bucharest. In the Capital there were images from surveillance cameras, witness statements, massive community participation, hours of televised debates on this issue. And the coverage also produced legal results.
“I believe that the Government should issue a GEO that gives the entire territory a deadline for the adoption of dogs, and those not adopted, I am sorry, will be euthanized,” was the opinion of Traian Băsescu, President of Romania.
Finally, legislators urgently pass a new law. It stipulates that a dog that is not adopted within 14 business days can be euthanized. The decision brings hundreds of animal lovers to the streets. However, at the same time, the law introduces a new term, remote adoption.
The government finally adopted the rules on euthanasia, three months after Ionuţ Anghel’s death. Thus, as of January 2014, the mayors may decide to euthanize the quadrupeds that are not claimed or adopted. The law is named after the murdered child.
The “woman eater” of Rădăuţi
Although he was detained a few hours ago, Vasile Lavric has been in the attention of the police since 2000. According to Monitorul De Suceava, he repeatedly struck his wife with a hammer on the head. However, after discharge, the woman lived with Lavric for another 5 years, until April 2005, when she disappeared without a trace. His wife’s sisters also disappeared without a trace, one in 1995 and the other in June 2005.
In 2014, Vasile Lavric was arrested again and spent about four and a half months behind bars. As he always claimed to be innocent, while in prison in Botoşani Penitentiary, he went on a hunger strike. His extreme action continued for more than 55 days, and he was transferred to the Târgu Ocna Hospital Penitentiary. At the end of August 2014, the Suceava Court of Appeal confirmed the Court’s decision and replaced the preventive detention measure with house arrest.
In this case, however, the press intervened only sporadically. Sometimes in 2014, sometimes now, and that’s it. Analysis, opinions, criminologists, profiling are missing. Even the analysis of the way in which the police intervened, which took the man at his word, is missing that the women left for Italy. Clear proof that if the press doesn’t intervene, the case is quickly forgotten.
[ad_2]
