Bangkok, Court of Appeal Ordered to increase the prison sentence to 10 years and 2 months. A police officer riding a big bike crashed into "Doctor Kratai" and died in 2022. He pleaded guilty, remaining 5 years and 1 month without parole. Point out that the serious situation is the police not respecting the law. Not to be a disgrace to society Reporters reported that on January 16 at the Criminal Court on Ratchadaphisek Road, the Court read the Court of Appeal's judgment in the black case number A. 399/2022 at Criminal Prosecutor 3, Dr. Anirut Supawatjariyakul, Mrs. Ratchanee Supawatjariyakul. Dr. Kratai's parents are the plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit. Police Lieutenant Norawit Buadok, 21 years old, Squad Commander, Company 2, Supervision Division 1, Crowd Protection and Control Division (Subdistrict 1, OCAF Headquarters), is the defendant in the crime. The offense of careless or dangerous driving. which may cause harm to persons or property and acting negligently causing the death of another person, using a car without a license plate on the driveway , Violating the use of a vehicle that has not paid annual taxes. 3. Using a vehicle that does not provide damage insurance for accident victims. , brought an incomplete car to drive and didn't have side mirrors installed ,Driving not close to the left edge. Driving a motorcycle faster than the law allows, driving without considering the safety or suffering of others, driving without following the signs on the road In the case that on January 21, 2022, during the daytime, Police Sergeant Norawit, the defendant, was riding a big bike, Ducati brand, Monster model, registration no. 1 KPH 9942, Chiang Rai, and collided with Dr. Wara. Lakna Supawatjariyakul or Dr. Kratai, an ophthalmologist at Rajavithi Hospital, while crossing the zebra crossing in front of Bhumirajanagarind Kidney Institute Hospital, Phayathai Road, Ratchathewi Subdistrict-District. Bangkok, which is a community area, at a speed of 108-128 km., which exceeds the legal limit of 80 km. per hour, until Dr. Waralak died and asked the court to order the confiscation of the motorcycle seized by the investigating officer as a confiscated item. and there is a request for the court to revoke or suspend the driver's license of the accused as well In this case, the Superior Court issued a verdict on April 25, 2022, ruling that the defendant, Pol. Police Sergeant Norawit, committed the crime as charged and will be imprisoned for a total of 1 year and 15 days, without parole. The defendant was allowed to be released. temporarily during the appeal Later, the plaintiff and co-plaintiff filed an appeal asking the court to impose a harsher sentence. The defendant filed an appeal asking the court to postpone the punishment. Today the defendant came to court. The Court of Appeal examined the documents and consulted together and found a problem and had to decide whether the Court of First Instance punished the defendant for driving faster than the law specified without regard to the safety and suffering of others. Impris onment for 1 month was reduced to half the sentence. Then he would be imprisoned for 15 days and punished for careless driving causing the death of another person, 2 years in prison. The sentence was reduced in half, remaining in jail for 1 year, and the defendant would not be fined on this charge. without waiting for the determination or punishment of imprisonment for the defendant is appropriate or proportionate or consistent with the seriousness and circumstances of the defendant's offense And the penalty rate prescribed by law or not? Considered that the defendant's offense was serious. Because while committing the crime The defendant is a police officer with a duty to care for public safety and enforce the law and should strictly abide by the law. But the defendant did not respect the law and violated the law himself. without considering the safety of people's lives and have behavior in violation of the law The defendant was driving a motorcycle that did not have a license plate. which is when the defend ant commits an offense and the defendant escapes It makes tracking down the perpetrators more difficult. The defendant drove a motorcycle without paying annual taxes. If it were a general public committing this crime Must be arrested and fined by police officers without exception. The defendant did not arrange for damage insurance for car accident victims, which is required by law to protect car accident victims to receive timely help and initial medical treatment. When the incident happened The deceased and the two co-plaintiffs therefore did not receive compensation or initial compensation from the insurance company. The defendant drove without a side mirror. and drive at high speeds up to 108-128 km per hour in the urban area in front of the hospital. which exceeds the speed limit specified in the ministerial regulations. In addition, there appears to be a zebra crossing rule for pedestrians crossing in front of the said hospital. The defendant should have slowed down his car to be careful not to hit pede strians crossing the road. Instead, the defendant drove his motorcycle and accelerated to overtake other cars at high speed. Causing the car to hit the deceased at a zebra crossing until his body flew high and fell to the ground very far from the point of impact. The deceased had a broken skull. broken spine Several ribs were broken and a lung was torn from being hit by the motorcycle that the defendant was driving, flying far away and crashing onto the road. The defendant is a police officer who should abide by the law more strictly than ordinary people. in order to be a good example But the defendant violated the law in many ways. The defendant is a police officer whose primary duty and responsibility must be to consider the security and safety of people's lives and property. But the defendant's behavior clearly shows that the defendant did not take into account such duties and responsibilities in any way. Both the defendant's circumstances violated the law in many ways. It shows that the defendant underst ands that being a police officer does not have to be done in accordance with the law. Duties performed according to law are the duties of ordinary citizens. The defendant's actions also mislead the general public into believing that the Royal Thai Police has not paid attention to training its personnel to consider their duties and responsibilities in strictly complying with the law by upholding security and safety in the country. People's lives and property are as important as they should be. Therefore, it is considered that the punishment that the Court of First Instance handed down to the defendant was too light. It is inappropriate and proportionate to the seriousness of the defendant's offense and the penalty prescribed by law. Otherwise, there would be no more serious circumstance of committing an offense on this basis that would warrant a more severe punishment. It is appropriate to punish the defendant more severely than the Court of First Instance determined without waiting for the determination of p unishment and waiting for the prison sentence to be given to the defendant. In order not to cause society to have peace and be confident in the safety of crossing the road at a zebra crossing for the offense of driving faster than the law specifies. without considering the safety and suffering of others It was considered appropriate to impose a prison sentence. 2 months for the offense of careless driving causing the death of another person, which according to Section 291 of the Criminal Code is punishable by imprisonment not exceeding ten years. and a fine not exceeding two hundred thousand baht It was seen that the defendant should be imprisoned for 10 years and when the defendant was given a new prison sentence without waiting for the prison sentence, which was considered appropriate for the circumstances and the seriousness of the defendant's offense. Therefore, no further fines will be imposed for the said offense. After the incident, the defendant did not escape and confessed throughout the investigatio n and court proceedings. Whether it is because there is strong evidence or it may be because the evidence has been surrendered, as the two co-plaintiffs appealed. It is still beneficial to the court's consideration. The Court of First Instance reduced the defendant's sentence by half. The Court of Appeal agreed. The appeal of the plaintiff and the two co-plaintiffs was partially heard. The defendant's appeal was not heard. The judgment was resolved as follows: For the offense of driving faster than the law allows. Without regard to the safety and suffering of others, imprisonment for 2 months. The offense of careless driving causing the death of another person is imprisoned for 10 years. The sentence is reduced in half for each count of speeding. More than required by law Without considering the safety and suffering of others, imprisonment for 1 month for careless driving causing the death of another person will be imprisonment for 5 years. When combined with fines for other offenses according to the judgmen t of the Court of First Instance, it will be Imprisonment for 5 years and 1 month and a fine of 4,000 baht unless amended to comply with the judgment of the Court of First Instance. After listening to the Court of Appeal's judgment Pol.Lt.Norrawit Submit a request with securities3 100,000 baht asks for temporary release The Criminal Court considered the request and agreed that it should be sent to the Supreme Court to consider bail. After that, correctional officers took the defendant into custody at the Bangkok Remand Prison while waiting for an order from the Supreme Court. Which normally takes approximately 2-3 days. Source: Thai News Agency
Sunday, September 08, 2024