The Directorate for Investigating Organised Crime and Terrorism (DIICOT) says, in the ordinance to close the “August 10” case, that there was a moral complicity of the peaceful protesters in Victoriei Square, who did not distance themselves from those who exerted violence on the law enforcement officers, but were actually amused.
Moreover, DIICOT says that not all “collateral victims” of the violence in Victoriei Square were also “innocent victims”.
In the document drawn up by the DIICOT, by which the Gendarmerie heads were not charged for the intervention in force against the protesters present in Victoriei Square, prosecutors say that, after 16:00, some protesters were violent towards the gendarmes, throwing stones and bottles at them.
The prosecutors show that the attempts of the gendarmes to extract from the crowd the violent protesters failed, especially due to the attitude of peaceful protesters.
“Starting at this time, the Romanian Gendarmerie forces used materials and means in their service, including irritants and tear gas, punctually, in the direction where the persons manifesting violently were, for the purpose of preventing the breaching of the objective, ensuring the protection of the personnel, as well as maneuvering forces in view of isolating and extracting from the crowd violent persons, operations most often ending in failure, given that protesters assumed to be peaceful disapproved by booing, gestures and violent manifestations the demarches of law enforcement officers,” the DIICOT mentions.
Prosecutors say that the way violence was exerted on law enforcement “had a character of novelty, reflecting a mutation in the action plan”. Thus, the aggressions came from the entire length of the cordon, with increased mobility, both in the contact area, as well as from the mass of participants (second and third rows and deeper).
The DIICOT says that, despite repeated appeals addressed to peaceful protesters to distance themselves from persons manifesting violently, the former “were amused” by the violence exerted on law enforcement officers.
Prosecutors state that, throughout the entirety of the events on August 10 and on the night between August 10/11, gendarmes initiated and operated, “where and when such an intervention presented guarantees of safety for their own personnel and the perspective of minimum effect on other participants in the protest,” the extraction from the crowd of persons identified as having a violent behavior, but “the said type of intervention did not enjoy support even from the protesters assumed as being peaceful, their reactions (cursing, booing, threatening gestures, etc.) accompanying the actions of those who by violent manifestations were endangering not only the bodily integrity of law enforcement officers, but, in equal measure, were endangering the other participants in the protest.”