[ad_1]
However, the Varėna court based the law enforcement arguments on flour and acquitted J. Jankauskienė, and the Kaunas Regional Court Chamber, headed by Jūratė Jakubonienė, rejected the prosecutor’s complaint on Friday.
The actions of the officials caused much doubt, speculation and suspicion: during the investigation, an examination of the girl’s mother was futile, a principled police officer was fired, and the prosecutor Regina Juškevičienė persistently sought the conviction of J. Jankauskienė.
After the Varėna court acquitted her in December last year and found the Audi driver guilty, the prosecutor’s office appealed against this sentence, asking that J. Jankauskienė be sentenced to 2 years of probation.
The woman, who lost her daughter, was forced to experience tremendous stress, having been crossing 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 took place 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 in that At the time, Toyota was simply swept away by a 7-car Audi Q7. Catherine was released from the hospital three days later.
Audi maneuvered dangerously
Varėna judge Loreta Janiulytė emphasized that J. Valasinas, the driver of the Audi SUV, was maneuvering dangerously in difficult traffic conditions, overtaking the column of cars at high speed and heading into the lane in the opposite direction.
When J. Jankauskiene showed the corner, the drivers behind him started to brake, but the Audi driver did not do so after making a double corner.
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 news portal lrytas.lt 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 kept smoking, ”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 who drove Audi, J. Valashin, behaved in an unsafe and risky manner.
Said I was under pressure
A.Puodžius, 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 investigation moved in a way that was beneficial to the capital’s businessman.
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.
The 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 examination expert.
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, by contrast, found that Audi driver J. Valšinas was at fault for the accident.
There was no schematic project
Judge L. Janiulytė stated that the experts’ conclusions raise reasonable doubts about their reliability, because the investigations were carried out without all relevant data, the experts did not adequately and thoroughly 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, informed the direction of the Alytus Public Prosecutor about this.
After rejecting the complaint of the prosecutors who accuse J. Jankauskienė, they must now initiate an investigation against the Audi driver.
