Home / Romania / Colonel Corcodel and the Vataf mentality: Heads of the Gendarmerie, sued for parliament / how the criminal group worked – Essential

Colonel Corcodel and the Vataf mentality: Heads of the Gendarmerie, sued for parliament / how the criminal group worked – Essential



The commander of the Gendarmerie administration and service base, Colonel Marian Corcodel, and his deputy, Daniel Iancu Preoteasa, were sued by DIICOT for incest, embezzlement, and the establishment of an organized crime group. According to prosecutors, since 2011 Corcodel has created a network of subordinates and loans with 10-20% interest, where the recipients are also subordinates to the colonel. Investigators are talking about Corcodel’s Vataf mentality, which sold Gendarmerie’s property in its own interest.

High Commissioner Octavian Cristescu, an employee of the Directorate-General for Internal Protection of the Ministry of the Interior, who allegedly provided “protection”

; to Corcodel, and Georgică Adrian Băbănău, a non-commissioned officer for the gendarme, the colonel’s driver, were also charged in this case.

How did the network work as a colonel?

DIICOT says in a press release sent on Thursday that since 2011 Colonel Marian Corcodel, commander of UM 0260 – The administrative and service base of the Inspectorate – General of the Romanian Gendarmerie, with the influence of subordinates and illegally using its privileges constitutes a criminal group . He was joined by people under his direct subordination: Daniel Iancu Preoteasa (Chief of Staff of the Gendarmerie Administration and Service Base) and Georgică Băbănău (Colonel). The group would specialize in crimes against detention and embezzlement.

The “recipients” of the interest-bearing loans were generally subordinate to Colonel Corcodel or persons in his relationship, and the amounts borrowed ranged from a few hundred euros to a few thousand, sometimes even tens of thousands. The interest rate was between 10 and 20%.

The interest paid by the debtors was often collected by Daniel Preoteasa and Georgică Băbănău or by people who did not know the origin of the money and who later handed over the amounts to Corcodel.

Who gave Corocodel protection

Prosecutors also accuse Colonel Corcodel of repeatedly ordering subordinates to seize large amounts of fuel (mainly diesel) from the unit’s gas station. The fuel was illegally removed from the unit and transported to places where it was handed over to the colonel or other members of the group.

According to DIICOT, although the existence of this group, as well as the acts committed by its members, were carried by several Gendarmerie workers and to the knowledge of Octavian Cristescu, Chief Commissioner, employed in the former Department of Intelligence and Internal Protection – currently the Directorate-General for protection Internally by MIA, which has such professional obligations to report to the management of this structure and at the same time notify the criminal investigation bodies, it did not fulfill these obligations.

In addition, Octavian Cristescu constantly and deliberately supported the criminal activities carried out by Colonel Corcodel, which gave him both the necessary protection and advice in certain situations, the investigators say.

Prosecutors say Daniel Preoteasa was perceived as one of Colonel Corcodel’s trusted men, to whom he provided unconditional support in all situations, and instead benefited from the help of his commander for easy access to the ranks of the military hierarchy and functions within the Administration Base and Gendarmerie Service.

For his services, Daniel Preoteasa was rewarded by Corcodel by facilitating his promotion to the rank of lieutenant colonel and by giving him authority as the first deputy commander of the unit.

Defendant Georgică Băbănău was another trusted person by Colonel Corcodel, a non-commissioned officer in the Romanian Gendarmerie, with the rank of Adjutant Pilot Leader, who performed both the duties of driver for Commander Corcodel and the secretariat of his office inside the Gendarmerie Administration base. and Service.


“Card at Corcodel”

Prosecutors say that at the time of the establishment, the purpose of the group led by Colonel Corcodel was to commit crimes, so that he would later, in early 2015, be aware of a diversification of the area of ​​concern by expanding it towards committing forgery, in continuous form, activities which was implemented between November 2015 and July 2017.

According to prosecutors, Marian Corcodel withheld from her subordinate paychecks to recover the money given to them by bill.

Defendant Corcodel Marian succeeded through his own style, but also through native or cultivated abilities throughout his life and professional development.> from hierarchical superiors, to whom sometimes contribute various forms of indebtedness, generally moral, which the defendant managed to discreetly attract, by providing seemingly insignificant services, providing goods of relatively low value and facilitating relations in the business environment or in other structures in the Ministry of the Interior .

The criminal activities carried out by the defendants Corcodel Marian, Preoteasa Daniel and Băbănău Georgică, mainly aimed at committing crimes of war and embezzlement, were notorious in the collective of the Gendarmerie Administration and Service Base, the term even used by military personnel.> when one wanted to illustrate the situation of the person, who comes from the subordinates, who ended up in debt / debtor to the defendant, with or without interest (there were situations where, to prove his generosity and generosity, the defendant did not demand interest in the amounts granted) “situation where the debtor’s card was handed over to the defendant as a guarantee”, the DIICOT prosecutors also state.

According to them, Colonel Corcodel, who showed a “vataf” mentality, used the goods of the unit he led in his own interest.

“An expression of a mentality of> replied Corcodel Marian in his own interest in the assets of the public institution he headed, which through its status as a military unit, at least theoretically, would have created increased feelings of trust / security / safety, not only for the staff employed, especially for society. In reality, the defendant’s behavior of subordinates was perceived as discretionary and benefited from the administration and logistics of the administration and the service base indefinitely to satisfy personal interests or the group of relatives, to the detriment of the Romanian Gendarmerie, “says DIICOT.

The document was sent to the Bucharest Tribunal.




Source link