The crime of Tjaša Andree Prosenc that became time-barred due to sufficiently long concealment

In a series of criminal acts that Federico Pignatelli and his mother Doris Mayer suffered at the hands of their lawyer Tjaša Andree Prosenc, the theft of a larger sum of money also stands out. Without any legitimate justification, 115.000 EUR was transferred from Doris Mayer's Austrian bank account to an account that Tjaša Andree Prosenc held at the Swiss bank UBS. This is an ordinary theft, which, however, was not punished because of the statute of limitations.

In this regard, a preliminary criminal procedure first took place in Austria, but then the Austrian authorities directed Doris Mayer to a civil lawsuit, which, due to the statute of limitations, was not successful. It is another act that was kept hidden from the elderly lady for a very long time and that she only learned about years after the theft. Therefore, the question of the statute of limitations also arises in this case.

Doris Mayer completely trusted her lawyer. Tjaša Andree Prosenc was responsible for denationalization procedures and the return of family property that had been seized from the Mayer family. Because Doris Mayer was absent from Slovenia for most of the time, she also authorized her lawyer and Peter Krisper to manage her bank accounts. However, they were authorized exclusively to use funds for paying court fees and other legal obligations.

Only after the discovery of the main fraud—forgery of documents and the registration of an illegitimate representative of the company Eurocapital in the court register—did the uncovering of a series of other acts begin. Peter Krisper transferred an amount from Doris Mayer's Austrian bank account to Tjaša Andree Prosenc's Swiss bank account.

In the preliminary criminal proceedings in Austria, Tjaša Andree Prosenc claimed that it was payment of invoices for her services over the years. However, Doris Mayer and Federico Pignatelli denied the existence of any actual basis for the transfer. They paid all invoices for services as they went and in cash.

Only shortly before the conclusion of the preliminary criminal procedure did Tjaša Andree Prosenc recreate a document listing the types of services. According to Federico Pignatelli's claim, the document is forged and the obligation did not exist. Because of the statute of limitations, however, this theft was never punished.