We are publishing the details of the prosecution’s investigation into the “boy in the car” who attacked a traffic policeman: “Galli and excuse me.”

The Prosecutor said that he had questioned the boy, who raped the traffic police, Zahra Al-Maadi, and the owner of the car in which he was traveling. It is the incident that became known in the media as “the child’s car.”

The Prosecutor’s Office said in a statement: “The Public Ministry asked the police to inquire about the current topic of the investigation, which resulted in the identification of the attacked police individual, the person of the attacking child and the owner of the car in which he was traveling, revealing the details of its metal plates. “

The “Public Ministry” asked the policeman, who testified that on the afternoon of October 26, a child was notified to drive a car in Barauna in the area of ​​Zahraa Maadi – his place of service – for which he stopped the car and he found a boy who was driving it in the company of other people of the same age, and asked him about the car and driver’s licenses. He was surprised when the boy and his companions raped him by telling him and threatening to harm him, then a video was recorded between him and the driver of the car until he went to the front of the car to write down the number of his metal plates and note a violation of the incident. Then the boy, the driver and those accompanying him later approached to apologize to him, for which he accepted his apology, denying his injury from the incident.

And by the “Public Ministry” questioning the child driver -at the age of thirteen- about what is attributed to him of insulting a public official -one of the agents- by saying while and for the performance of his work, and raping him At that time, and driving a vehicle without obtaining a driver’s license and without a driver’s license, he decided that the car he was driving during the incident was the property of his father’s friend who bought it from the latter, and that day, while he was He was in the house of his father’s friend, he stole the car keys to walk in it without the knowledge of its owner, then he called his friends to accompany him, and when they met the policeman he stopped him and asked him for the license and driving the car, and he refused to drive it. Then the conversation between them took place until the policeman went to the front of the car to write down the number of their license plates, so he left with him for fear of issuing an infraction against his owner and was surprised at that moment that the foot of the Police collided with the car door, so he returned later, offering his apologies, for which he accepted it, adding that one of his friends had filmed the clip that was circulating. Denying your knowledge of someone who posted it on social media.

When the “Public Ministry” questioned the owner of the car – a friend of the father of the accused minor – about what was attributed to him of endangering the life of a minor and allowing him to drive a vehicle when he was under eighteen years of age, which caused damage to others, he denied what was attributed to him, denying his knowledge or permission to drive to the accused. The car, explaining that the latter came to him at noon on the day of the incident, returning from his school – as he used to – and then he was surprised that he left the residence after a while, and when he inspected his command from the balcony , saw him stop his car – used in the incident – in the back of the house. He warned him not to repeat his action, confirming that he had bought the car from the defendant’s father in early October, when he presented the original contract to sell it to the Public Ministry.

The “Public Ministry” had assigned a social worker “Child Care Line of the National Council for Childhood and Maternity” to study the social and psychological case of the accused minor and prepare a report on it, and deposited a report in which he showed that the minor was deeply pampered by his father, prompting him to commit such behavior, recommending his surrender to his family. And they promise to correct his behavior and hold regular sessions for him.

The Public Ministry decided, in light of the provisions of Article 119 of the Children’s Law, that it required not preventive detention for a minor who did not exceed fifteen years of age, and in light of what the social worker recommended to deliver the accused minor to his guardian, promising to protect him, take care of him and subject him to rehabilitation. Behavior modification sessions, as recommended by the “Child Helpline” report, and the Prosecutor’s Office decided to release the owner of the car if he pays a financial guarantee of ten thousand pounds pending investigations, and is being completed questioning who was in the company of the minor charged with the car at the time of the incident and requesting investigations Final police around.