Examples of using Astorga in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
But Mario Astorga.
Mario Astorga, already in interview two.
Panero spent his childhood in Astorga.
Mario astorga. didn't I talk to him? Yes.
Concerning: Mario Francisco Tadic Astorga.
You know what, mr. astorga? Maybe I should have opened with my closer.
It was on the road from Emerita(modern Mérida) to Asturica Augusta modern Astorga.
All this has placed Mr. Tadic Astorga in a position of defencelessness.
Mr. Tadic Astorga has been held for more than five years without having been sentenced.
At the end of that period, Mr. Tadic Astorga should have been released.
Covadonga Astorga, Joint Research Centre European Commission.
On 5 October 456 Theodoric defeated Rechiar in a battle at the Campus Paramus twelve miles from Astorga on the Urbicus Órbigo.
It is also alleged that Mr. Tadic Astorga was interrogated in the absence of his defence lawyer.
Almanzor crossed the Duero and invaded Castile near Madinat Selim, where he sighted an army under Sancho García and the"Galician kings",consisting of troops from as far as Pamplona and Astorga.
Mr. Tadic Astorga has found it very difficult to arrange meetings with his lawyers and prepare his defence.
He is also mentioned as having insisted on the restoration of the bishops of León and Astorga, who had been deposed for unfaithfulness during the persecution but afterwards had repented.
Mr. Tadic Astorga was interrogated in various police vehicles, then in annexes of the airport of Santa Cruz.
The Supreme Court of Justice ordered that the trial of Mr. Tadic Astorga take place in the town of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, where he lived and where he was arrested.
Mr. Tadic Astorga was arrested without an arrest warrant from a competent authority and without being found in flagrante delicto.
As the source points out,Mr. Tadic Astorga has been severely deprived of his right to presumption of innocence and to a fair trial with full procedural safeguards.
Mr. Tadic Astorga is deemed by the State authorities, the public prosecutors, the press and other media to be guilty even before having been sentenced.
According to the source, Mr. Tadic Astorga is one of only two survivors of the police operation carried out in the Las Américas Hotel in the early morning of 16 April 2009.
Mr. Tadic Astorga was interned in the"Grulla" section of San Pedro Prison, where he was held incommunicado for several weeks, in violation of article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which limits incommunicado detention to a maximum of 24 hours.
The source reports that Mr. Tadic Astorga was held in pretrial detention under article 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which sets a limit for such detention of 18 months.
Mr. Tadic Astorga complains that he was tortured by former officers of the Directorate General of Security, the Ombudsman's Office and the Public Prosecution Service, both in Santa Cruz de la Sierra and in La Paz, in an attempt to force him to confess to charges of terrorism and being part of an irregular armed group, something which he refused to do.
Mario Francisco Tadic Astorga, born on 2 August 1954, holds Bolivian and Croatian citizenship and is a former officer of the Croatian army, having retired due to disability.
In May 2013, Mr. Tadic Astorga told the First Criminal Court of La Paz that he had been pressured by the authorities to incriminate himself and that he had been subjected to torture for that purpose.
The same day and in the same place,Alejandro Astorga Valdés, a Chilean national, was allegedly brutally beaten after being taken out of his cell by the PNP-DINOES Major with the approval of Commander Miguel Guillén Tejada, the prison director.
The Working Group recognizes that Mr. Tadic Astorga was held in pretrial detention for an initial period of 18 months, in keeping with the provisions of article 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which establishes 18 months as the maximum term for such detention.
As regards the evidence against Mr. Tadic Astorga, the source affirms that the physical evidence was not correctly inventoried, that it is full of errors, that the dates on which it was gathered were not recorded and that the chain of custody cannot be determined.