Hanoi Court believes that the behavior of defendant Truong Van Minh, 16 years old, stemmed from a conflict between children while playing sports, along with his impulsiveness, competitiveness, and lack of thinking when wanting to defend his younger brother.
The verdict announced this afternoon by the Long Bien District People’s Court determined that the defendant committed the crime when he was 15 years old and showed remorse, so the sentence was below the lowest limit – 4 years and 9 months in prison. This is a sentence that the court of first instance considered sufficient to “deter and educate”.
In addition to the prison sentence, the defendant and his representative must compensate the victim’s family more than one billion VND. The court noted that the defendant’s family has paid 300 million VND.Nguyen Thi Phuong Huyen read the verdict on the afternoon of December 17.
Previously, in the indictment, the representative of the People’s Procuracy assessed that the defendant’s actions were dangerous to society. However, considering all the factors, the People’s Procuracy proposed a sentence of 4-5 years in prison for the crime of Intentional Infliction of Injury.
This morning, Mr. Tam (45 years old, Minh’s father) was summoned to court as guardian. Mr. Tam’s remaining son, Khang, 11 years old, is one of the 8 witnesses summoned by the court.
As the representative of the 13-year-old victim who died, Dat’s mother brought her son’s portrait to the court.
The jury said the victim, the defendant and many witnesses were all under 16 years old, so the trial was held in a friendly courtroom, run by people trained in and understanding the psychology of minors. Journalists were not allowed to film or take photos.
The indictment determined that at around 3:10 p.m. on March 17, Minh’s younger brother Khang, 11 years old, and his grandfather went to Le Mat communal house, Viet Hung ward, Long Bien district. While jogging around the basketball court, Khang met Dat and a conflict arose. Khang was slapped in the face by Dat.
Khang went home and asked his brother, defendant Minh, to come and resolve the conflict. The children’s grandmother saw this and called Mr. Tam and asked him to follow the two children to intervene and prevent them from fighting.
Khang said he was beaten in the communal house yard, so Mr. Tam told him to get on a motorbike and take him away. On the way, he asked about the incident specifically, but seeing that his son was not seriously injured, he said, “They were just teasing me.”
When arriving, Mr. Tam parked the car about 30 meters from the communal house gate, told his two children to go in and meet their grandfather to resolve the matter, while he turned the car around and went home.
About 10 meters from the communal house gate, Mr. Tam felt uneasy so he turned back to check, looking into the communal house yard to find his two children.
Before that, Minh and Khang did not go to see him but went straight to the area where Dat and his friends were playing basketball. Minh asked: “Who hit my brother?” Khang pointed to where Dat was standing and said: “That guy hit me.”
The indictment stated that Minh punched Dat once in the left cheek, causing him to fall.
Mr. Tam ran back to stop them and took his two children home. He then returned to check on Dat’s health and saw that he was dizzy and pale, so he bought him some water to drink. After drinking the water, Dat vomited, so Mr. Tam and his friend took him to the emergency room. After being transferred to many hospitals, on May 21, the victim died at the National Children’s Hospital.
Authorities determined that the eighth-grade boy died of multiple organ failure – a consequence of brain hemorrhage.
Regarding the mechanism of injury formation, the forensic conclusion shows that the victim was punched once on the left cheek, causing the skull to move in the same direction as the impact force. When the victim fell, the head hit the stone floor, causing the movement to be blocked. From here, the brain would suddenly move in the opposite direction in a short time, causing vibrations and impact on the skull, leading to contraction, rupture of cerebral vessels, cerebral hemorrhage…
Defendant’s father: I was too subjective, I feel guilty towards Dat’s family.
During the interrogation, the defendant gave the same statement as the indictment, saying he did not know the victim, and that his younger brother told him so he ran out to “settle the matter”. When his father told the two brothers to go see their grandfather, Minh said he “didn’t see him” so he turned to find Dat to resolve the conflict.
Minh claimed that he acted alone, surrounded by only his younger brother and the victim’s group of friends, with no adults witnessing it. After beating his friend, the defendant heard his father yelling.
“My younger brother asked me to come out and resolve the conflict, why didn’t I talk to him? Do you see the consequences? Now, because of a very small incident, it affects many people, the first of which is you and your future,” the panel of judges analyzed.
Defendant Minh bowed his head and said: “At that time I did not realize that I would cause my friend’s death.”
Present in court, Minh’s younger brother, Khang, was asked by the jury about the origin of the conflict with the victim. He said that while he was jogging in the yard, “a stranger” (the victim Dat) came and told him to beat up another friend, but Khang refused, so Dat sat on him and slapped him in the face.
Regarding the reason for taking the children home and then returning to the communal house yard, Mr. Tam said he knew the children went to the same school, “if they fought today, they would probably have another conflict if they met at school tomorrow”, so he went out to advise and see how Dat was doing.
“You saw the children having a conflict but didn’t take any measures to resolve it and just left right away?”, the judge asked. Mr. Tam burst into tears and admitted that he had been too subjective and failed to fully assess the situation.
“This incident was partly my fault, knowing there was a conflict but not stopping it. If I had told my child to stay home… I could not have foreseen the incident, causing suffering to the child’s family, causing suffering to the child’s mother,” Mr. Tam said and turned to the other side of the courtroom, bowed deeply and apologized to the victim’s mother.
“I’m sorry. I don’t know what to say now other than sorry to you, sorry to the family,” Mr. Tam said.
Victim’s family requests to change charge to Murder
The victim’s mother said that when she arrived at the hospital, she found her son unconscious. She accused Minh of bragging about the crime and texting his friends without remorse. The defendant’s family did not inquire about Khang’s health.
She requested to change Minh’s charge from Intentional Infliction of Injury to Murder and prosecute Mr. Tam as an accomplice.
The prosecution agency determined that Mr. Tam’s purpose in taking his two children to the communal house yard was so that the two brothers could meet their grandfather to resolve their conflict. The fact that the children did not comply and instead went to beat and injure Dat was beyond Mr. Tam’s subjective consciousness.
When he witnessed Minh beating Dat, he ran to stop his son. His testimony was consistent with the witness testimony and other evidence in the case file. Therefore, Mr. Tam was not an accomplice with Minh in the act of Intentional Infliction of Injury.
As for Khang, the prosecutor determined that he was an accomplice with his brother, but when he committed the crime, he was only 11 years, 5 months and 20 days old, not old enough to be held criminally responsible. The investigation agency has notified Khang’s place of residence and school to coordinate management and education.
The victim’s family requested compensation of more than one billion VND. The defendant’s family has paid compensation of 100 million VND.
Regarding this, in court, Mr. Tam said that right after taking Dat to the hospital, he went home to prepare money and stayed at the hospital all night. “During the time Dat was at Hospital 108, I was there almost the whole time. When Dat’s mother filed a complaint with the police, my two children and I had to go to the police station to give statements and set up the scene, so we couldn’t go to the hospital,” Mr. Tam explained, saying that he asked his sister to go to the hospital on his behalf.
Mr. Tam said his family had to endure “cyber violence, a terrible wave of terrorism” after Dat’s death. His family received text messages, threats, curses, and dirty objects thrown at them at home…
Regarding the 1.2 billion VND requested by the victim’s family, Mr. Tam said this was too large an amount, so he requested the panel of judges to consider it according to the law.
Source: vnexpress.net
