The plan was based on the preparation of the so-called allographic wills. It does not have to be written by the testator’s hand, but perhaps on a computer. Of course, not only the handwritten signature of the testator is necessary, but also the signatures of two witnesses who confirm that it is indeed a manifestation of the last will.
The main mastermind of the fraud got two well-known old men as witnesses, for this he secured the services of a Slovak lawyer and, after the start of the inheritance proceedings, submitted a forged will in mid-2016 with the legend that the testator had signed it a year earlier in a law firm in Bratislava.
If the plan were successful, the men would seize real estate, cars and money in the accounts in the total amount of 35 million crowns.
But the “handwritten” signature on the will was revealed to be fake, and the men went to court. The main organizer received 6.5 years at the High Court in Prague, the Slovak lawyer received five years, and the two witnesses left with five and four years in prison.
They did not go to the Supreme Court
The trio of helpers sought support against the punishments at the Supreme Court, but none of them succeeded.
One of the witnesses demanded judicial mercy, saying that he has been taking care of two sons all his life and is also a disabled pensioner with extensive health problems.
The other objected that he did sign the will, but he didn’t actually know what exactly he was signing. In addition, the lawyer contested the expert opinions regarding the fake signature and claimed that the verdict was based on extreme inconsistency with the evidence presented.
The Senate of the Supreme Court headed by Antonín Draštík swept their objections off the table. He referred to the statement of the main organizer and other evidence, such as the one that documented the activity on the home computer of an old man in Prague at the same time when, according to the fraudsters, he was supposed to be sitting in Bratislava and dictating his last will.
The judges also reminded that the two alleged witnesses to the signature knew the victim well and knew about her property. The convicted lawyer was then reminded that he had confirmed with his signature that the entire creation of the will was in order, although it was exactly the opposite.
