The court ruling is already causing a storm: will releasing an 18-year-old girl be punishment enough?



[ad_1]

After reviewing the appeals, it was decided that the abuser would have to spend one more year in a behavior change program.

The court also increased the moral damage that M. Icikevičius must pay to the affected girl. Instead of the 5,000 previously granted. EUR, moral damage increased to 10 thousand. euros.

We remind you that the court of first instance sentenced M. Icikevičius to 3 years and 4 months, postponing his execution for three years.

(18 photos)

PHOTO GALLERY. Jurbarkis court, which brutally injured a girl

The prospects are not encouraging

Mindaugas Vasiliauskas, a lawyer representing the girl victim and her relatives, stated on tv3.lt that he was saddened by the following court decision:

“We expected a different (solution – aut. Past).” I truly believe that our appeal should have been upheld and the defendant should have received a harsher sentence. It is good that moral damage has been increased, but it is certainly not a sufficient punishment for such a crime.

The defendant produced documents for his good behavior, but it is also so obvious that after what he did, his conduct must have been impeccable. The danger of the act itself had to be assessed more rigorously, rather than how the person behaved afterward.

We emphasize how cruel the girl was treated, the serious injuries that were inflicted on her, how cynically he behaved immediately after the crime was committed. But that was not taken into account. “

The lawyer added that after knowing the reasons of the court, the appeal will be decided before the Supreme Court of Lithuania:

“Only to the extent that the Supreme Court accepts a very small proportion of such appeals. The practice developed by this court before this case was more in favor of the accused than of the victims. “

The lawyer added that the girl continues to take medication, suffering from insomnia, pain. “The decision will sadden her and her father”, summarized M. Vasiliauskas.

The position of the prosecutor

Aurelijus Stanislovaitis, Deputy Chief Prosecutor of the Klaipėda Regional Prosecutor’s Office, highlighted that the court decision taken today had reinforced the responsibility of the convicted person:

“He is obliged to additionally participate in the behavior change program. Non-pecuniary damage was also increased. In any case, such a decision will disappoint the victims. The court ruled in detail on the sentence. The expectations of the victim do not always coincide. with the administration of justice.

On appeal, the case was heard by not one but three judges who responded to the arguments of the appeals. The administration of justice cannot be said to have gone in the wrong direction. The decision is not final. Therefore, a cassation appeal may be filed within a period of three months. “

The prosecutor added that the decision in such a case is in line with the jurisprudence in which a minor is sentenced to prison.

Three charges

In November last year, the news portal tv3.lt wrote that the prosecutor of the First Prosecution Division of the Klaipėda Regional Prosecutor’s Office, who was leading the pre-trial investigation, during which the circumstances of the events in the rural tourism farm in Tauragė district, transferred the case to Tauragė.

The 17-year-old from Jurbarkas was charged under three articles of the Penal Code: attempted rape of a minor, sexual abuse and serious health problems.

The pre-trial investigation began on May 26, 2019, when a 16-year-old girl was beaten at a rural tourism farm in the Tauragė district. During the six months of the pre-trial investigation, three dozen surveys were conducted, most of which also involved a psychologist, and various examinations were conducted and the necessary data collected and analyzed.

The findings of forensic and psychiatric experts obtained during the pre-trial investigation indicate that the injuries sustained by the injured girl and the resulting consequences for her health should be classified as minor according to the criteria established by law.

Therefore, the 17-year-old was charged with a mild illness under article 138 § 1 of the Penal Code. Other complaints have been made for serious violent crimes.



[ad_2]