[ad_1]
According to the court, although the comment written by the woman after the video clearly shows signs of misconduct, all the evidence in the case confirms this, the author of the comment does not deny guilt, but can be sentenced less than a specific article. of the Code of Administrative Offenses.
“When evaluating the circumstances established in the general context of the official’s own misconduct and in accordance with the criteria of fairness and reasonableness, the court concludes that the objectives of administrative responsibility will be achieved by imposing on LP
That decision was made last week by Judge Mindaugas Povilanskas.
Outraged by the officer’s blow to the arrested
The comment, which was heard in court, the woman wrote in early January after the news portal 15 minutes in a video posted on Facebook on his account, which captures how Vitalijus Vaitkevič, a police officer in the capital, uses a telescopic pole to arrest a man and beats him.
This time, a conflict broke out in one of the Vilnius apartment buildings when two policemen came on duty for a demonstration in violation of quarantine requirements and alleged violence.
The agents who arrived found five people in the apartment who celebrated the return of one of them from prison. As the situation in the apartment worsened, Officer V. Vaitkevič hit one of the men in the apartment with a telescopic pole, knocked him to the ground and detained him. Another man in the apartment was also detained, tear gas was used and reinforcements were called in.
In a post-video comment, the woman called the officer with an uncensored word and said “they should get a couple heads together.”
According to the court, these words were spoken with a negative connotation to insult and humiliate a policeman. V. Vaitkevič himself stated in his official report that he felt offended and humiliated, he understood the words as a direct attack against him as an official.
The use of physical force by an official against a person was excessive and the taking of other actions against other people was unreasonable because the people did not pose any real direct danger to the life or health of the officials.
The woman apologized for her comment, apologized to the police officer she had insulted and asked not to be fined because she is unemployed, caring for a disabled mother.
“The imposition of an administrative sanction must comply with the requirement of proportionality: there must be a fair balance between the crime committed and the penalty imposed for that crime, the objective pursued and the means to achieve that objective,” the court ruled.
Police determined the officer’s actions were illegal
The ruling underlines that during the examination of the case the court demanded the conclusion of an official inspection, in which the Vilnius County Police Chief Commissariat, while assessing the officer’s actions, declared that the behavior of V. Vaitkevič was illegal.
“The use of physical force against a person by a police officer was excessive and the taking of other actions against other people was unreasonable, since the people did not pose, perform or threaten the life or health of the officers in no real direct danger. In summary, it was established that the actions of V. Vaitkevič were unreasonable, inappropriate to the existing circumstances, disproportionate to the existing danger and not necessary for the proper performance of those functions, ”the court affirms.
According to the court, this finding also found that such actions by the official justified the negative reaction from the public and undermined the authority of the police as an institution.
“In the present case, it is obvious that the person subject to administrative responsibility, after having seen the video published on the social network 15min.lt of the social network, could be outraged by the actions of the policeman, who, as already mentioned ,) words to exercise their freedom of expression ”, stated the court.
In mid-March, the capital’s police reported that “certain tactical errors” had been identified in the actions of officer V. Vaitkevič, for which a service penalty, a comment, was imposed.
R. Matonis: The officer succumbed to provocation
According to Ramūnas Matonis, representative of the Police Department, during the inspection it was established that the official’s language was inappropriate, it did not reduce, but further increased the aggression of the offenders.
“Although the requirement to go outside to draft a protocol was legal, it was not clear what led to further escalation of the conflict. Police tactics experts assessed the fact that the officer approached the offender in an unsafe manner, did not maintain a safe distance and caused him greater danger and more stress in this situation, “R. Matonis told BNS.
According to him, although the people in the apartment complied slowly or not at all with the requirements of the officers, the police officer did not warn the offender or the legal consequences for non-compliance with legal requirements or that he would use coercion.
The police officer was forced to repeat the request and, in case of non-compliance, to warn about the use of coercive measures. Failure to meet the repeated requirement should have turned into passive resistance. Therefore, the strike of a policeman with a telescopic baton was valued as unreasonable and inappropriate to the current circumstances ”, explained the representative of the Police Department.
This was assessed as a tactical error during the official inspection.
According to him, in summing up the situation, it should be noted that V. Vaitkevič did not fully assess them, gave in to the provocation of the offenders with his actions and, as a result, used inappropriate coercive actions.
“During the official inspection, this was evaluated as a tactical error, which caused an additional situation, for which an official sanction was imposed on the official, an observation,” summarized R. Matonis.
According to him, in order to avoid such situations in the future, the conclusion of the inspection was transmitted to the police psychologists and the police school to draw attention to tactical errors during training.
A court decision on a warning can be appealed to the Vilnius Regional Court within 20 days.
[ad_2]
