“I had thoughts that I could not control.” New information about the suspected student has sent threatening messages to dozens of schools and hospitals. The prosecutors had it in the viewfinder but decided that bomb threats are not criminal

The 17 -year -old teenager, heard on Wednesday In the case of threats transmitted on the addresses of dozens of public institutions, it was also investigated by the Romanian authorities and in 2022, when Romania faced a wave of threats with the bomb. DIICOT prosecutors decided last year to classify the file on the grounds that the facts are not provided by the criminal law. Also last year, the US authorities issued an arrest warrant on behalf of the Romanian teenager, demanding his extradition. The Romanian judges opposed.

• The mother of the Romanian teenager told the judges of the Bucharest Court of Appeal that the online environment negatively influenced the son, copying deviant behaviors found on various groups, according to the CAB, consulted by HotNews.
• In court, the 17 -year -old student claimed that he had “certain thoughts and obsessions that could not control them”, being influenced by the people encountered on the online groups he frequented.

Dozens of schools, shopping centers, markets from several counties of the country were evacuated in 2022, after official email addresses were transmitted that bombs are to be detonated. Following the investigations, DIICOT prosecutors found that the author of the false alarms was the same young man as the one heard by police. Then, the teenager was 14 years old and could respond criminally for his actions. Was charged for terrorist -type threats, but was no longer sent to court

“By the ordinance of 06.03.2024- of the Prosecutor's Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, the Directorate for Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism offenses, it was ordered to classify the case against the suspect for committing the crime of threat for terrorist purposes, provided by art. no.

Monitored by DGASPC of 2023

Nine months away, after the file was classified by DIICOT, the American authorities issued arrest warrant on behalf of the Romanian teenager, requesting its extradition.

The trial was tried at the Bucharest Court of Appeal. On January 21, 2025, when the Court decided to place the 17 -year -old student at home until the extradition request was resolved, representatives of the General Directorate of Social Assistance and Child Protection Sector 6 were also present, which monitor the minor from 2023.

“The psychosocial evaluations carried out between 2023-2024 by DGASPC Sector 6 Bucharest, from which it turns out that the co-optation of the family members and the extradiable person were tried to direct his criminal behavior in a positive direction, however, the instructions and meetings did not produce the desired result,”

The court emphasized that a milder preventive measure would not be appropriate as the family “fails to master his criminal tendencies”.

Blamed the online environment

In the extradition process judged by the Bucharest Court of Appeal, the teenager's mother complained that the online environment was the one who negatively influenced the son and that, in fact, the deviant behaviors were copied from the Internet, according to the CABs, consulted by HotNews.

Before the court, the teenager recognized the facts imputed by the American authorities. He asked to be released, assuring the judges that he would not be closer to gads.

The adolescent told the CAB judges, he began to send threatening messages as he “had certain thoughts and obsessions that could not control them.”

“He believes that the people he encountered in the online environment have influenced him to have such conduct he regrets,” the CAB judge retained at the conclusion of January 21.

The court rejected in May the request for extradition, invoking the “state of mining from the moment of committed”, but also the different legislation of the two states regarding the punishments. In the US, the Romanian adolescent risks life imprisonment for the seven charges. The decision remained final at the High Court of Cassation and Justice