[ad_1]
The police guilty of the accident was not the 40-year-old son of an influential businessman from Alytus, who was also in business and lived in the capital, but the mother of the deceased girl. The conviction of Jankauskienė.
After the Varėna court acquitted her and found the Audi driver at fault, the prosecutor’s office appealed against this verdict.
On Tuesday, the Kaunas Regional Court opened a complaint requesting that J. Jankauskienė be found guilty and that the Varėna Court’s verdict in favor of her be reversed. There will be no further questioning, the complaint will be dealt with at a hearing and then a ruling will be issued.
The Prosecutor’s Office requests that J. Jankauskiene be sentenced to 2 years in prison and that his lawyer Linas Kuprusevičius dismiss the complaint and leave the judgment of the Varėna court in force. J. Jankauskienė herself requested the same.
The Kaunas Regional Chamber of Judges, headed by Jūratė Jakubonienė, will publish its verdict on the complaint on April 23.
The woman, who has lost her daughter, has been mining the thresholds of the courts and law enforcement agencies for almost 7 years to clean up the stain of the perpetrator of the accident. L. Jankauskienė is supported in court by her husband Vaidas Jankauskas, who accompanied her during a serious accident.
The tragedy occurred on November 1, 2014 on the Valkininkai-Daugai-Alytus highway: J.Jankauskienė, who was going to rest in the parking lot with his family, turned into the parking lot on the left, showed a turn, but at that time , Toyota was simply dragged by an Audi Q7. Catherine was released from the hospital three days later.
Audi maneuvered dangerously
Varėna judge Loreta Janiulytė emphasized that the driver of the Audi SUV was maneuvering dangerously in difficult traffic conditions, overtaking the car’s column and driving into the lane in the opposite direction at high speed.
When J. Jankauskiene showed the turn, the drivers coming from behind began to brake, but the Audi driver did not do so after making a double curve.
According to the judge, the Toyota driver could not have guessed that the SUV would bend the entire column at high speed.
The court ruled that J. Jankauskienė had not violated traffic regulations, although the prosecution and experts convinced otherwise.
He bowed, crossing a continuous strip
The permitted speed at the scene of the accident is 90 kilometers per hour.
According to the state test, the man driving the Audi was traveling at a speed of 99 kilometers per hour.
J.Jankauskienė’s lawyer, L. Kuprusevičius, drew the attention of the lrytas.lt news portal to the fact that forensic experts only determined the speed that was there just before the collision.
According to witnesses, the Audi driver braked twice before the collision: an independent expert estimated the car’s speed at about 125 kilometers per hour.
Witnesses have noticed this Audi from Vilnius. One person recalled how the SUV curved him through a continuous double lane and continued to smoke, ”said L. Kuprusevičius.
In the immediate aftermath of the accident, another witness got stuck in the words of an Audi driver: At the crash site, the latter admitted that only his speed was to blame. It attracted the attention of the court, but not of the forces of order.
The witnesses also pointed out that the businessman driving the Audi was unsafe and risky.
Said I was under pressure
A.Puodis, a police officer from the Varėna District Police Station, who arrived at the scene of the accident and initiated the pre-trial investigation, had no doubt that the Audi driver was at fault for the accident. He wrote this conclusion.
However, A. Puodys later claimed that he had received pressure from a police investigator; He had been told three times that the documentation needed to be rewritten to be useful to the businessman driving the Audi.
After refusing to do so, A. Puodys was fired.
Like a magic wand, the research was developed in a way that was beneficial to the businessman from the capital.
Regina Juškevičienė, prosecutor of the Alytus District Prosecutor’s Office, taught that the main cause of the accident was the actions of J. Jankauskienė on the road: as if he were turning left, the Audi driver no longer had the opportunity to avoid a collision.
Representatives of the Lithuanian Forensic Science Center explained that J. Jankauskienė was the culprit of the accident, although the first expert examination was carried out by an unqualified specialist, but his colleagues who conducted subsequent expert examinations admitted that they were based only on the first expert examination .
It was reported that the weight of the Audi Q7 was incorrectly entered into the program during the exams.
An independent expert, Dr. Valentinas Mitunevičius, on the other hand, found that the Audi driver was to blame for the accident.
There was no schematic project
Judge L. Janiulytė stated that the experts’ conclusions raise reasonable doubts about their reliability, since the investigations were carried out without all the relevant data, the experts did not adequately and in detail examine the course of the traffic accident.
Another strange thing turned out to be that the pre-trial investigation material did not contain a draft outline of the incident or filmed material, and only photographs taken from one side appeared in the case.
The Varėna court, upon seeing the guilt of the businessman sitting behind the wheel of the Audi, reported this to the direction of the Alytus Public Prosecutor’s Office. If the complaint of the prosecutors who accuse J. Jankauskienė is rejected, they will have to open an investigation against the Audi driver.
