Facts
The case concerns a person, X., accused of pornography and production of child pornography images. X.'s wife was heard by the police as a person called to provide information (PADR) without being informed of her right to refuse to testify as a witness. The court must determine whether the wife's statements are admissible as evidence.
The facts of the case are as follows: X. was accused of taking photos and videos of minors and sharing them with other people. X.'s wife was heard by the police as a PADR, but she was not informed of her right to refuse to testify as a witness. The court must determine whether the wife's statements are admissible as evidence.
Considerations
The court examined the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrimPC) relating to the hearing of persons called to provide information (PADR) and the right to refuse to testify. The court found that X.'s wife had not been informed of her right to refuse to testify as a witness, which is a fundamental right in criminal procedure.
The court also examined the case law relating to the hearing of PADR and the right to refuse to testify. The court found that X.'s wife's…