This afternoon, the criminal trial against Chania Chante Fernandes Pedra was scheduled to take place regarding the accident on January 4, 2025, in which she struck and killed Ms. Josely Paulina Vasquez (65) and Mr. Carlos David Vialez Valerio (54) before fleeing the scene.
Chania Fernandes Pedra once again appeared in court without legal representation. The Judge decided to proceed with the case regardless. At that moment, Chania Fernandes Pedra lodged a formal complaint (recusal motion) against the Judge, causing the trial to be postponed.
This afternoon, the Judge commenced the trial proceedings against Chania Fernandes Pedra, whom the Prosecution charges with running over and killing Ms. Josely Paulina Vasquez (65) and Mr. Carlos David Vialez Valerio (54) on January 4, 2025, and subsequently fleeing the scene. The Prosecutor also charges Fernandes Pedra with driving a Jeep without a driver’s license, driving under the influence of alcohol, speeding, and being in an emotionally compromised state. Furthermore, Fernandes Pedra faces charges of attempted manslaughter against Ms. Williams and Mr. Fernandes Rivas, who were also crossing the street at that time.
Amendment to the Charges
The Prosecutor presented an amendment to the indictment. The Prosecutor explained that Fernandes Pedra was tested for alcohol and the report originally listed a level exceeding 300 micrograms of alcohol in her blood. The Prosecutor requested the Judge to amend this figure to 295 micrograms, a request with which the Judge agreed.
Once Again Without an Attorney
Chania Fernandes Pedra appeared alone in court. The Judge expressed disappointment that Chania still lacked legal counsel. The Judge stated that yesterday morning Chania sent an email requesting a postponement due to not having an attorney and asking to be released from custody.
The Judge noted that there is a detailed official record of every occasion Chania Fernandes Pedra appeared without representation and of all procedural steps taken to provide her with court-appointed counsel free of charge. None of these measures proved successful.
Prosecution’s Response
The Prosecution maintained that under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), having legal representation is a fundamental right and that the defendant must be given adequate time to prepare. However, the Prosecutor emphasized that competing interests must be considered, namely those of the victims’ families. In the Prosecutor’s view, after 5 postponements and numerous attorneys who for various reasons ceased to represent her, the case needed to proceed. Attorney Mr. Hatzmann, representing the victims’ families, echoed the Prosecutor’s position, stating that the interests of the community and the victims’ relatives must prevail over the defendant’s right at this juncture. The Judge briefly adjourned the session to evaluate Chania’s requests.
The Judge Decided to Proceed with the Trial
Upon resuming, the Judge agreed to the amendment of the indictment reducing the reported alcohol level. The Judge stated that Chania faces very serious charges and still lacks counsel, noting how exceptionally difficult it is to make rulings while balancing all competing interests. Since court-appointed attorneys have been rejected and there is no indication that private or legal-aid counsel will be retained, the Judge concluded there was no merit in further postponements and ordered the trial to proceed.
At that moment, Chania shouted “NO!”, stood up, and attempted to exit the courtroom. Officers from the Judicial Security Service (CEA) prevented her from leaving. Chania began crying and stated that she did not want to remain. The Judge reiterated that the trial would continue but permitted her to step outside briefly. Escorted by CEA officers, Chania left the courtroom in tears. The Judge returned, but Chania continued crying and refused to re-enter. Upon her eventual return, the Judge informed her that she had the right to decline to be present, but that the trial would proceed in her absence and a verdict would be rendered in three weeks.
Chania told the Judge that she wanted to be present but emotionally could not handle it.
Chania Leaves the Courtroom
As the Judge began hearing the substance of the case, Chania stated she could not remain, asked the victims’ families for forgiveness for what happened, and exited the courtroom.
Chania Files a Complaint Against the Judge
Later, Chania requested to re-enter the courtroom. Shortly after her return, a court official presented an email to the Judge. The Judge announced that a letter had been received on Chania’s behalf lodging a formal complaint against the Judge, alleging that the case was not being tried fairly and stating a lack of confidence in the Judge. The Judge expressed surprise at this development. When asked for the reason behind the motion, Chania exercised her right to remain silent.
Complaint Hearing Scheduled for Friday
The Judge briefly suspended the session to review the applicable procedure. Upon returning, the Judge announced the postponement of the trial, stating that a three-judge panel will hear the challenge against the Judge on Friday, November 6, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. The trial on the merits has been rescheduled for November 18, 2026.
