[ad_1]
From 12 to 13 January 2011, seven cars were lit one after another in Marijampolė. The machines caught fire breaking glass and throwing flammable materials into the cabin.
Law enforcement officials identified the perpetrators and nine of them appeared in court. They were initially convicted of terrorism, but on appeal they heard a lighter verdict and were found guilty only of damaging property in a universally dangerous way.
According to the police, Arūnas Jakštas rounded up the gang of arsonists. He reportedly tried to take revenge on the officer and force the Marijampolė police to refrain from taking legal action against his friend.
After a long legal fight, A. Jakštas proved that these accusations were unfounded and was acquitted.
The Appeal Court considered Arūnas Jakštas’ appeal against the Kaunas Regional Court in 2018. January 18 convicted and convicted of intent to intimidate part of the public and police stations arson, to select suitable persons for these crimes and thus destroy and damage other people’s property on a large scale in a universally dangerous way.
This case is being examined for the second time in the Lithuanian Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court of Lithuania in 2019 November 12 referred only to the appeal for reconsideration of Arūnas Jakštas.
A.Jakštas only one appealed the procedural decision of the appeal body to the Supreme Court of Lithuania, the other convicts did not appeal the decision in this case.
The Lithuanian Court of Appeal noted that the regional court convicted A. Jakšt on the basis of the testimony of three witnesses. The Lithuanian Court of Appeal, after evaluating the testimony of these individuals, ruled that the testimony was unreliable.
According to the jurisprudence of the Lithuanian courts and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, such evidence cannot lead to a conviction. Therefore, the panel of judges acquitted A. Jakšt.
“The conviction cannot be based on presumptions, and in this case no evidence has been gathered that A. Jakštas ordered to organize an arson, select the right people for these crimes and thus destroy and damage foreign property in a universally dangerous way “, said A. Piesliakas.
In this criminal case, A. Jakštas’ guilt for organizing the arson was essentially based on three sources of evidence: the testimony of one witness who was subject to anonymity and the testimony of two witnesses who had been acquitted.
The panel of judges of the Court of Appeal, having re-examined the criminal case on the basis of A. Jakštas’ appeal and examined the testimony of the three persons in the context of other evidence gathered in the case, concluded that the testimony of those persons it was contradictory. the circumstances of the events indicated by the anonymous witness.
This judgment of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal will enter into force on the day of its adoption and may be appealed in cassation before the Lithuanian Supreme Court within three months.
[ad_2]
