The lawyer from Iași, Alexandra Cioată, 7 years in prison after a crazy race in traffic: accusations that she intentionally hit a motorcyclist. Reasoning of the court
The lawyer Alexandra Cioata was sentenced in the first instance to 7 years in prison with execution for attempted murder. The court determined that, following an illegal race in traffic, she intentionally hit a motorcyclist with her car, amid a traffic conflict, according to the court's reasoning.
The lawyer is accused of trying to kill a motorcyclist PHOTO FB / Alexandra Cioata
According to the reasoning of the Iasi Court of Appeal, the incident took place on May 30, 2024, when the lawyer engaged in a race on public roads with a motorcyclist. Following this, after being overtaken, the woman followed the motorcycle and swerved suddenly, colliding with it.
The judges noted that, although the defendant did not directly follow the occurrence of the victim's death, she accepted the possibility of such an outcome, her actions being classified as indirect intent. The court emphasized that the manner of driving, the speed and the maneuvers performed indicate aggressive behavior and extreme risk-taking in traffic.
“The court appreciates that the action of the defendant to recklessly and aggressively drive a powerful car at a high speed, in an urban area, on a main thoroughfare, with medium traffic and without taking any previous or concurrent measures to avoid the serious result shows that the defendant accepted the possibility of an accident with serious consequences for the injured person. Under these conditions, the passive mental attitude towards the risk created, previously assumed, and the lack of any reaction to prevent the accident, suggests indifference to the consequences of his actions, which falls within the notion of indirect intent,” it is stated in the reasoning of the court of first instance, according to Libertatea.
In her defense, Alexandra Cioata argued that she was provoked by the motorcyclist and that there were external factors that influenced her behavior, including possible poor health or even substance use. However, these claims were not confirmed by the administered evidence. The forensic psychiatric examination concluded that she had discernment at the time of the act.
“The defendant consciously and spontaneously adopted an aggressive behavior in traffic and followed the injured person from the departure from the traffic lights in front of the LIDL store, and by moving at a high speed and approaching the motorcycle in front of him, he accepted the possibility of producing the result provided for by art. 188 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code, i.e. the death of the victim, although he did not expressly follow this”. the court also shows.
“Final and crushing report” in the case of the death of lawyer Monica Cioata: “She was thrown from the balcony” by her boyfriend VIDEO
The court also rejected the invocation of mental illnesses as mitigating circumstances, noting that episodes of depression did not influence the behavior on the evening of the incident.
“Neither the personal situation of the defendant – the fact that she is experiencing financial difficulties and takes care of raising and educating the minor child alone – do not represent, in the opinion of the court, elements that mitigate the degree of social danger she presents in relation to the social values protected by the criminal law, because, on the contrary, the age of the defendant, her life experience, the pursuit of a legal profession should have determined her to adopt a responsible behavior in the family and society”.
claims the court”
According to the cited publication, the judges considered that the subsequent actions of the defendant, including the attempt to repair the vehicle involved in the accident in another locality, indicate an attempt to hide the traces of the act.
“Contrary to the claims and justifications of the defendant regarding the behavior adopted after the commission of the crime, namely the intervention of a state of shock and the attempt to protect his minor child from the consequences of exposure to the consequences of the road accident, the court considers that they cannot explain her subsequent steps to travel with the car used in the commission of the crime of attempted murder to another locality to be repaired, so that it can be removed the traces of the collision and hindered the activity of the criminal investigation bodies to identify and collect the evidence necessary to clarify the factual situation and find out the truth. Therefore, the court will retain and capitalize against the defendant's behavior adopted after the commission of the crime, namely leaving the scene of the crime, followed by the trip with the vehicle involved in the Negresti locality, where he intended to repair it without authorizationthat, with the aim of removing the traces of the impact with the injured person's motorcycle”, the court also states.
The motivation also states that the woman previously had an aggressive driving behavior, involving herself in illegal car races, aspects that were taken into account when individualizing the punishment.
“Under the aspect of the real circumstances in which the crime of attempted murder was committed, the court notes that the defendant adopted an aggressive attitude in traffic, endangering both the life of the injured person and the integrity of other traffic participants, including pedestrians (through the risk of the motorcycle speeding towards the sidewalk or the refuge of the tram station) as well as that of the minor child and the pet inside the vehicle he was driving”the court also states, according to the quoted source.
The court established the sentence of 7 years of imprisonment in detention, considering that it is necessary for the seriousness of the act and for the prevention of similar acts.
The decision is not final. The file is currently in the appeal phase at the High Court of Cassation and Justice, with a deadline set for May 26, 2026.
