[ad_1]
It was established in the case that by resolution of the specialist of the Klaipėda Police Service LM-G. was penalized for driving at a speed of 128 km / h on the Klaipėda – Liepoja highway while driving a vehicle at the prescribed speed of 70 km / h. A fine of 500 euros was imposed on the woman and an administrative sanction measure: deprivation of the special right to drive vehicles for three months.
This is stated in the press release of the Klaipėda District Court.
The woman filed a complaint with the court, stating that the day before the offense, she had her car repaired in a garage and only got it back after 3 days. These circumstances were confirmed by the request for the car repair order, the invoice issued and the deed of acceptance of cash.
During the period of the administrative offense, the car with which the administrative offense was committed was in the possession of the owner of the auto repair shop, so the woman can only guess when and to whom she allowed to use the delivered car for repair. The woman said she had not committed any crime for which she was found guilty.
The car service owner proved at the court hearing that the woman did indeed turn over the car for repair and it was returned to her approximately three days after the receipt for the money was issued. While the car was being delivered for repair, another person was driving it to the airport.
There is usually a replacement car in the garage, but I didn’t have one at the time. While the woman’s car was being repaired, she turned it over to a customer who was a citizen of another state.
The court, following the jurisprudence of the Lithuanian Supreme Court, ruled that the guilt of a person in cases of administrative misconduct can be established when, after examining the evidence gathered during the proceedings, there is no reasonable doubt that the person prosecuted committed a punishable offense.
In the present case, the institution that drew up the record and the appealed order did not clear up the doubts about the guilt of the person subjected to administrative responsibility. Therefore, after evaluating the defensive position of the woman (alibi) and the supporting evidence in the case, the court concluded that the violation recorded by the mobile speedometer on the main Klaipėda-Liepoja LM-G road. She did not do so because the car was not in her possession at the time and the crime was committed by another unidentified person at the time of the process.
The court accepted the woman’s complaint, overturned the sentence of the Klaipėda Police Service specialist and terminated the administrative misdemeanor procedure.
The Klaipėda Police Service appealed this decision to the Klaipėda Regional Court, but the appeal court found the appellant’s arguments regarding the incorrect evaluation of the evidence and the existence of an administrative fault in LM-G to be unfounded. behavior. The court concluded that the contested decision is justified and lawful, there are no reasons to annul or modify it for the reasons stated in the appeal.
The ruling of the Klaipėda Regional Court is not subject to appeal.
[ad_2]
