logo

Lawyer denounces ‘criminal takeover attempt’ against businessman Vitalie Perciun


https://www.ipn.md/index.php/en/lawyer-denounces-criminal-takeover-attempt-against-businessman-vitalie-perciun-7967_1090361.html

The businessman Vitalie Perciun is being the target of a hostile takeover attempt, and these “criminal attacks” take place with the help of law enforcement and “crime kingpins”, claims Oxana Eșanu, lawyer for Perciun.

Eșanu told a press conference la IPN that fake reports have been circulated in the media about Perciun’s brief detention. It was falsely claimed that he was arrested on money laundering charges. Also, during an online broadcast, it was claimed that the businessman was arrested for extorsion, fraud and blackmail, with the creator “taking advantage” of Perciun’s inability to promptly reply to clear his name, says the lawyer.

“I’m now holding the arrest warrant, issued by commissioner Valeri Țurcanu. This commissioner is an officer of the Criminal Investigation Directorate. The cited reason for this warrant is Article 191(5), and not at all what Mr. Rizea or Mr. Ungureanu claimed on the channel 112”, said Oxana Eșanu.

The lawyer says  that the person conducting the criminal investigation holds “a personal grudge” against the businessman and, having access to the case, offered a “thief” valuable information about Vitalie Perciun’s bank accounts.

The attorney mentioned that Vitalie Perciun was heard as a suspect and during this process, evidence was presented proving that the assets which make the object of the investigation were bought with Perciun’s own money. This is a building owned by a company founded by Vitalie Perciun. However, the intermediaries involved in selling it transferred only 33 lei, and on top of they now claim 10 million lei in damages as part of a criminal case.

Eșanu says that the commissioner refused to accept the documents shown to him as evidence and now the lawyer and her client are making efforts to have the case investigated elsewhere.

Note: IPN offers the right of reply to anyone considering they were touched by the news items produced based on statements of the organizers of the given news conference, including by facilitating the organization of another news conference in similar conditions.