Criminal Charges During Demonstrations
Participating in a demonstration is a fundamental right, but street dynamics can sometimes escalate or lead to complex public order situations. Finding yourself accused of violating a dispersal order issued by law enforcement causes deep concern and requires immediate legal protection. As a criminal lawyer in Milan, Avv. Marco Bianucci handles these cases with a rigorous analysis of the facts, aware of the fine line between exercising a constitutional right and facing criminal charges.
The Legal Framework: Dispersal Orders and Violation
In our legal system, the management of public order during gatherings in public places is primarily governed by the Consolidated Text of Public Security Laws (TULPS). When a public security authority issues an order to disband and disperse, usually through the prescribed trumpet calls or audible warnings, participants are obliged to leave. Remaining at the location after such a formal order exposes the citizen to criminal consequences, which can range from a violation of Article 650 of the Criminal Code (disobedience of authority orders) to more serious charges if episodes of resistance to a public official occur.
It is crucial to understand that criminal liability is strictly personal. The prosecution must prove not only the physical presence of the individual at the scene but also their actual awareness of the dispersal order and their voluntary decision to disobey it. Often, amidst the clamor and confusion of a demonstration, law enforcement's communication may not be heard or understood by all present, creating an evidentiary gap that a careful and precise defense must explore.
The Bianucci Law Firm's Approach
The approach of Avv. Marco Bianucci, an experienced criminal lawyer in Milan, focuses on a meticulous deconstruction of the prosecution's case. The Bianucci Law Firm does not limit itself to evaluating the reports drafted by law enforcement but initiates a proactive defense investigation. This involves acquiring and critically analyzing every available piece of evidence to reconstruct the sequence of events: surveillance footage from the area, amateur videos shot by participants, photographs, and direct testimonies from those present.
The primary objective is to verify the formal and substantive regularity of the dispersal order and, above all, to contextualize the conduct of the individual client. It is carefully assessed whether there were actually viable escape routes, whether the order was unequivocal, and whether the failure to leave was dictated by a genuine intent to disobey or by physical impediments due to the crowd. Every detail, even one that seems insignificant, can prove decisive in demonstrating the absence of the psychological element of the crime or the material impossibility of complying with the issued order.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the risks if I don't leave after a dispersal order?
The most immediate consequence is a formal complaint, which initiates criminal proceedings. Penalties vary depending on the specific law violated, potentially involving arrest for up to one year or monetary fines, in addition to the conviction being recorded in the judicial records. If the failure to disperse is accompanied by acts of active resistance or violence against law enforcement officers, the penalties become significantly more severe.
Can I be convicted even if the demonstration was peaceful and authorized?
Yes, the initially peaceful or properly notified nature of the demonstration does not exempt participants from respecting a legitimate dispersal order. The competent authority can order dispersal if it perceives subsequent dangers to public order and safety. The crime is constituted when a formal order to leave is knowingly disregarded, regardless of the legitimate reasons that initiated the protest.
How can I prove I didn't hear the police order due to the noise?
Proving the failure to perceive the order is one of the cornerstones of a solid defense strategy. This is achieved through the cross-analysis of audio-visual material that attests to the high level of noise pollution at that specific moment, the distance of the individual from the source of the audible warning, and the testimonies of other people present in the same specific area. However, it is up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the order was given in the prescribed manner and was objectively perceptible by the accused.
Legal Protection and Case Assessment in Milan
Facing criminal charges arising from complex street dynamics requires clarity and a deep understanding of procedural rules. The costs and timelines of criminal proceedings depend on numerous factors specific to each case, the volume of evidence to be analyzed, and the necessary defense investigations. During an initial in-depth consultation, Avv. Marco Bianucci, a criminal lawyer, will analyze the available documentation to provide a clear and transparent overview of the situation and the required commitment. Contact the Bianucci Law Firm, at their Milan office located at Via Alberto da Giussano 26, for a rigorous and professional assessment of your legal position.