[ad_1]
The Court of First Instance convicted four young men and a girl and sentenced three boys to 1 year to 1 year and 3 months in prison, and a boy and girl to 1 year, 6 months and 1 year to 9 months of prison, suspended. The second girl was acquitted because it has not been proven that she was involved in the crime. The victim received 332 euros in non-pecuniary damage from the condemned, reports the Klaipėda Regional Court.
The condemned and the victim appealed the verdict of the court of first instance. In their appeals, the youths asked to be acquitted, alleging that they were in the department, but that they did not contribute to the destruction of the department and to the damage and destruction of another’s property by a group of accomplices. The two convicted youths argued that the trial court’s ruling did not contain individualized acts of the accused, without discussing who specifically destroyed what elements. The representative of the young man sentenced to the third sentence of deprivation of liberty requested that the child be released from criminal responsibility, alleging that he had admitted his guilt, apologized to the victims and promised to compensate the damage caused to her before the court hearing.
On appeal, the victim did not agree with the amounts of material and non-pecuniary damages awarded by the Court of First Instance and requested total damages of 3,664.76 and 5,000 euros with respect to non-pecuniary damages.
The district court hearing the case dismissed the appeals and found that the case unequivocally established that the victim’s apartment had been demolished in several stages over 10 days by a group of people convicted in the case whose position was inconsistent. It was not possible to determine exactly when and what specific property in the victim’s apartment was damaged or destroyed by each of the people convicted in this case. The court noted that “once it has been established that the people have acted in a group of accomplices, it is not necessary for the members of the group of accomplices to identify the specific acts committed by each of them in incriminating them.” All those convicted in the case, seeing and perceiving the manifestly illegal actions of others, contributed to them, realizing that they were also behaving illegally and wanting to. The convicts acted by consensus and expressed their support for the actions of others.
The panel of judges, in response to the argument of one of the youth in the complaint, that the restriction of being at home from 9 pm to 6 am is excessive and does not allow the youth to develop harmoniously, because they cannot attend screenings of night movies, nightclubs, various concerts and events, stated that “attending nightly movie and night club screenings is not related at all to the harmonious development of personality, especially when the behavior restriction is during rest and at night.” The emergence of the consequences of negative restraints is a natural result of the crime committed, and the imposition of a punishment in accordance with the interests and wishes of the convicted person would clearly not only correspond to the purpose of the punishment but also to the principle of justice.
The panel of judges also rejected the request of one of the representatives of the youth convicted by law to release the child from criminal responsibility, stating that there were no grounds established by law, because the child did not apologize to the victim, admitted his blamed only partially, did not criticize his behavior. The commission of the crime gives no reason to believe that it will comply with the law and will not commit new criminal acts in the future.
The district court also dismissed the victim’s appeal, concluding that the issue of civil action for the award of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage had been properly resolved, the amount of pecuniary damage was determined based on objective data , the amount of material damage was sufficient, adequate and proportionate. in the context of the case.
The decision of the Klaipėda Regional Court takes effect on the day of its publication, but within three months it can be appealed on cassation to the Supreme Court of Lithuania.
It is strictly prohibited to use the information published by DELFI on other websites, in the media or elsewhere, or to distribute our material in any way without consent, and if consent has been obtained, DELFI must be indicated as the source.
[ad_2]
