RIETI – The control activity of the territory continues throughout the province, planned by the Police Commissioner of Rieti Maria Luisa Di Lorenzo, aimed at the prevention and repression of crimes, as well as, above all, at verifying the stringent anti-covid-19 measures arranged for the containment of the spread of the coronavirus.
During these services, on Saturday evening, in the historic center, a young man, who did not wear the prescribed respiratory tract protection, while he was about to be sanctioned by the agents of the Rieti Police Headquarters, after refusing to provide his personal details, fled. to avoid the sanction, supported by his father and his brother who, in the meantime, were insulting the men of the State Police with insults and threats in the presence of numerous citizens who, particularly surprised by the behavior of the three men, at that moment, crowded the downtown area.
The escaped boy, subsequently identified for the Rieti PR, in 2003, was blocked after a few meters, arrested and made available to the local Judicial Authority which ordered his translation under house arrest and before which he will have to answer for the crimes of resistance and insult to a Public Official.
His father PM, from 1967, and his brother PF from 2004, on the other hand, were reported in a state of freedom to the local judicial authority: the first, for the crime of threats to a Public Official and the second for the crimes of resistance, insult to Public Official, refusal to provide information on his personal identity, as well as for the crime of injury, as the minor, during the check, had a fight with one of the agents who, in the circumstance, suffered bruises, fortunately not serious.
Overall, on Saturday evening, the police patrols checked over 60 vehicles, 300 people and over 70 commercial activities.
During the checks, one person was sanctioned by the Municipal Police of Rieti, while 13 people were sanctioned by the State Police for the violation of anti Covid-19 measures; in addition to the boy arrested, for the other twelve the sanction concerned the failure to comply with the interpersonal distances within a public establishment that had allowed the consumption of dinner without respecting the maximum limit of four people per table.
The public exercise, sanctioned in the circumstance, was also subjected by the State Police to the ancillary administrative sanction of the closure of the commercial activity for 5 days.