[ad_1]
The Kaunas Regional Court today announced its verdict on the circumstances of the death of a 16-year-old boy at the Šančiai pedestrian crossing, which caused a great repercussion, for which the relatives of the teenager had appealed the sentence to the off-road drivers who they ran him over.
Disaster at the entrances to the cemetery
As already written, the author of this tragedy was the sentence of Aida Statkevičiūtė sentenced by the Kaunas District Court, which sentenced her to twice the sentence requested by the prosecutor, and the list of victims was reduced by one third. .
A.Statkevičiūtė, who was on paternity leave at the time of the incident, was charged with entering the crosswalk of the Audi Q5 SUV, unsure whether pedestrians were passing it and exceeding the speed limit.
This tragedy took place on the afternoon of July 31, 2018 at an unregulated crosswalk at the intersection of A.Juozapavičiaus Avenue and Rusų Street, located at the entrances to the Šančiai Cemetery.
The place of disaster
The specialists of the Lithuanian Forensic Science Center have established that 50 km / h are allowed in this place. A.Statkevičiūtė’s speed exceeded 10-20 km / h.
The 16-year-old, who was collided in the second lane, was shot about 30 meters long.
The tragedy happened to this Russian citizen from Murmansk, who was visiting his relatives who lived in Kaunas with his parents, returning from the Nemunas to his grandmother’s house, just behind the stop at the disaster site.
The 16-year-old died eight hours ago in the intensive care unit of the Kaunas clinics.
Emotions in court
“The bus in the first lane, which I was heading towards, approaching the intersection, did not stop. So I thought this was empty. However, almost at the level of the bus, something got stuck in my car. When I got out and asked the bus driver who was here, he replied that a boy had run towards the crossing, ”said A. Statkevičiūtė, who appeared before the Kaunas District Court.
Aida Statkevičiūtė
In addition, he stated that 60 km / h. He doesn’t really drive in town at full speed because he has a young child.
The bus driver told the court that according to the schedule, he was in a bit of a rush at the time, so he was only driving at 30-40 km / h. speed. And there were no pedestrians at the intersection he approached. However, about five meters before this, a young man suddenly ran in front of the bus. He didn’t even stop the bus. And soon he saw how said pedestrian was already flying through the air. And only then did he see an SUV stopped nearby in the second lane.
For a violation of the Road Traffic Regulations (TFE) committed by a sober driver that caused the death of another person, the Penal Code provides for a prison sentence of up to eight years.
Prosecutor Mindaugas Šukys proposed that A. Statkevičiūtė be sentenced to six years in prison, postponing his execution for a maximum period of three years. The lawyer representing the victims, Nerijus Plėdys, requested that the accused be sentenced to a real custodial sentence. His lawyer Karina Račkauskienė argued that the punishment requested not only by the victims but also by the prosecutor was too severe.
Judge’s arguments
Kaunas District Court judge Indrė Averkienė found A. Statkevičiūtė guilty of the tragedy, stating that his actions, speeding up and not slowing down at the crosswalk, whose visibility was blocked by a bus, were the main cause of the accident, although the victim was irresponsible and insecure.
However, the author of the tragedy was sentenced to a lesser sentence than that requested by the prosecutor: three years in prison, postponed two years. And forcing to work and not to leave the place of residence without the permission of the officials. Furthermore, A.Statkevičiūtė was deprived of the right to drive a vehicle for three years. And the truck in which he fatally wounded a sixteen-year-old girl was taken to cover a civil lawsuit. You no longer have any official property.
In imposing the sentence on A.Statkevičiūtė, I.Averkienė stated that she had taken into account that so far she had not been convicted, had no valid administrative penalties, was driving sober, had committed a negligent crime and was raising a minor.
The mother of the deceased A. Statkevičiūtė was sentenced to 25 thousand. moral reward of euros. For the father – 20 thousand. euros. 7 thousand for brother and 5 thousand for grandmother and aunt. euros. The complaints of the other three victims, who are distant relatives, were dismissed.
Photo by Laimis Steponavičius
If the complaint was rejected, the sentence became final
N.Plėdys, the lawyer representing the victims, appealing against the sentence to A.Statkevičiūtė, asked to toughen it, eliminating the fact that the victim was also negligent, which had an impact on the accident. That said, the claims awarded to the relatives of the deceased were also reduced. The complaint asked that they be increased.
Furthermore, the complaint states that A. Statkevičiūtė must be admitted to have committed other violations of the TFE. One of them is the use of a mobile phone while driving a car. In A. Statkevičiūtė’s phone records it can be seen that uninterrupted online data began to be received seventeen minutes before the event. And this, according to the relatives of the deceased, suggests that it may have caused her inattention when approaching the pedestrian crossing.
The victim’s representative’s complaint also emphasized that A. Statkevičiūtė deserved a more severe punishment, because he had not taken all the necessary measures to help her after reaching the age of sixteen.
The panel of judges of the Kaunas Valdas Vitunskas Regional Court, Gytis Večerskas and Jūratė Jakubonienė, who examined the complaint, said today that the testimony of witnesses and other evidence in the case confirms that the victim crossed a pedestrian crossing and that the telephone A. Statkevičiūtė’s mobile was The data does not yet mean that it has been discussed. In addition, the data of the case confirm that A.Statkevičiūtė tried to call the ambulance after the event, but did not do so due to the great shock he suffered. But then he pulled a kennel out of his SUV. Therefore, according to the aforementioned panel of judges, which examined the complaint, A. Statkevičiūtė received a just punishment and the issue of the lawsuits was duly resolved. Having said this, the complaint was rejected and the judgment of the Kaunas District Court against A. Statkevičiūtė entered into force.
[ad_2]
