at the time of the incident
was more than 20 months after the incident. On April 1, 2017, the much-watched "Nanjing 6.20 BMW Incident Case" was pronounced at the People’s Court of Qinhuai District, Nanjing City. The perpetrator Wang Jijin was sentenced. Sentenced to the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means and sentenced to 11 years in prison.
In this case, how did the two psychiatric appraisal documents that public opinion had been generally concerned about were released? Why did the term "acute transient" be deleted in the second appraisal? The trial of this case revealed it.
The BMW car slammed into Mazda at 195.2km/h, causing two deaths on the spot.
June 20, 2015 was the Dragon Boat Festival of the lunar calendar, and the life trajectory of the two young men came to an abrupt end on this day.
At that time, at an intersection in the downtown area of Nanjing, Wang Jijin drove into the traffic in front of him at high speed, instantly ending the young lives of a post-80s and a post-90s. Liu was born in the 1980s at the age of 26 and Xue was born in the 1990s. Only 24 years old. The accident left two families torn apart.
The Paper (www.thepaper.cn) learned at the court hearing that the parents of the two victims were suffering from illnesses, living on subsistence allowances, and living in difficulties. Liu and Xue were the only children and economic pillars in the family. Their suddenness The death of the family plunged the family into endless grief, and it also made the two families worse. The
indictment showed that Wang Jijin drove a Shaanxi AH8N88 BMW sedan to leave Nanjing Wuzhou Home Decoration Plaza at about 13:50. When he reached the intersection before the speed limit of 60 km/h, the speed was severely exceeded. He passed the intersection at 144.5 km/h. After
, instead of slowing down, Wang Jijin continued to accelerate along the main roads in Nanjing city for about 800 meters to the intersection of Shiyang Road and Youyihe Road in the city. When the traffic lights ahead and turning left were all red, the traffic lights were prohibited. I entered the left-turning lane and went straight at high speed, and rushed into the normal horizontal traffic at a speed of 195.2km/h, and violently crashed into the Mazda car driven by the victim, Xue Mou, who was driving a normal left turn from south to west at the intersection. The
collision caused the Mazda car to disintegrate immediately. Xue and Liu in the car died on the spot, and 6 cars and buses were damaged. The vehicle loss totaled more than 200,000 yuan. After the
case, Wang Jijin abandoned the car and left the accident site and walked to a construction site about 200 meters away, trying to escape, and was arrested by the police at 14:20 that day.
The prosecution believes that Wang Jijin’s behavior has constituted the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means. Although Wang Jijin was mentally ill before and at the time of the case, he still had the ability to limit criminal liability. According to the relevant provisions of my country's Criminal Law, mental patients who have not completely lost the ability to identify or control crimes can be sentenced to lighter or mitigated punishments.
The perpetrator claimed that he was "unconscious" at the time of the incident.
At 9 am on April 1, Wang Jijin was tried in the People's Court of Qinhuai District, Nanjing.
Wang Jijin, wearing a dark blue jacket and gray trousers, with a calm expression, was taken into the court by the bailiff. During the trial, he spoke slowly but clearly in the cross-examination and self-defense links. It is hard to imagine that the man in front of him caused a tragic car accident more than 20 months ago.
The court found that Wang Jijin was born in 1980 in Jingjiang City, Jiangsu Province. He was from a primary school and was the owner of the Nanjing Jijin Decoration Materials Business Department. Before the case was committed, he and his wife were engaged in water and electricity decoration materials business together.
The evidence presented by the prosecutor showed that Wang Jijin obtained a driver's license on March 16, 1999, allowing him to drive the model A2. He lived and worked in Nanjing urban area for many years, and he had been driving for 16 years until the incident. The BMW car involved in the accident was purchased by Wang from his brother-in-law Su somewhere in early 2015 for 400,000 yuan. After driving the car for less than half a year, an accident occurred. The
court found that two hours before the incident, that is, at 11 o'clock on June 20, 2015, Wang Jijin once called the police that someone killed him and his mobile phone had been monitored. However, after the police received the report, he made a clear request that the public security organs should register and file their reports, but refused to disclose personal information to the police.
During the trial, the prosecutors showed evidence that after the incident, the police investigated and learned that Wang Jijin had a mental disorder some time before the incident. He told the people around him that he had been tracked, his brains were not good, and his behavior Out of control. On the day of the incident, Wang Jijin had a cold expression and lack of concentration.
evidence shows that after the incident, Wang Jijin fled to a nearby construction site. Many workers on the construction site confirmed that when Wang ran to the construction site at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, he was covered in blood and mentally abnormal. He asked him what happened, but he was lying on the ground without speaking and standing unsteadily while walking.
After being captured, Wang Jijin was in a state of nonsense, showing an undecided appearance. At the police station, they even attacked the police and hit the wall with their heads.
Facing the police's inquiry, Wang Jijin stated that he drove faster when the incident occurred, and he did not pay attention to how fast he was. During the
trial, Wang Jijin said that the scene of the accident was shocking, and if he was conscious, it would never happen. His consciousness at the time was indeed unconscious, which caused such serious consequences.
He also said that he expressed deep guilt to the victim and felt that he owed the victim very much. He said "sorry" to the victim and his family, and expressed his willingness to do his best to compensate the victim's family. "Regardless of the verdict, I will face it with a penitent heart." Why did the second psychiatric appraisal fail to clarify the "acute transientness"? After the
case, in response to Wang Jijin’s abnormal performance, the public security agency entrusted the Nanjing Brain Hospital forensic appraisal of his mental state at the time of the crime. The appraisal opinion was that “Wang Jijin suffered from acute transient mental disorder when he committed the crime and has the ability to limit criminal liability. ". Once the
appraisal result was released, it set off public opinion. The close relatives of the victim Xue said it was difficult to accept the appraisal conclusion of "acute transient mental disorder" and applied for re-appraisal.
Therefore, the Qinhuai District Court of Nanjing commissioned the Institute of Scientific and Technological Appraisal of the Law University of Beijing to evaluate Wang Jijin’s criminal liability ability again. The appraisal opinion was that “the defendant Wang Jijin was in a mental illness before and at the time of the incident. When an illegal act was committed on June 20, 2012, it was assessed as a limitation of criminal liability."
's two mental appraisals and their appraisal results, although the appraisal conclusions are "restricted criminal liability capacity", but the identification of Wang Jijin's mental illness is different.
So, how did the "acute transient mental disorder" produced in the first identification come out? And why did the second psychiatric appraisal conclusion delete "acute transientness"?
In this regard, the appraiser from the Judicial Appraisal Institute of Nanjing Brain Hospital appeared in court and explained that after the appraisal agency was entrusted by the public security organs, each appraiser would individually review the papers (ie appraisal materials), and then jointly inspect the appraised person (Wang Jijin). Then discuss and analyze. After these steps were completed, they drove to the scene of the crime, followed the route of the incident, and went to the construction site where Wang Jijin visited after the incident. They investigated the witnesses on the construction site and finally formed an appraisal opinion on Wang Jijin, that is, " Acute transient mental disorder".
The appraiser further explained that the so-called "acute" refers to the rapid onset of the disease, while the "transient" refers to the short course from onset to remission, usually within one month. Mental disorders refer to the characteristics of such disorders with psychotic symptoms.
The above-mentioned appraisal staff said that in fact, "acute transient mental disorder" is often seen in psychiatric clinics. When a psychiatrist sees a patient with similar symptoms, he first finds the cause from diseases such as brain disease, physical disease, and poisoning. When the cause is not found, "the next diagnosis is based on clinical features", that is, acute transient mental disorder. According to the court trial, a considerable part of the materials on which the appraisal is based are witness testimony and statements by the parties.
For the second psychiatric appraisal conclusion, the “acute transient” diagnosis was deleted. The appraisal staff of the Institute of Forensic Science and Technology Appraisal of the University of France appeared in court and stated that Wang Jijin was mentally ill at the time of the case, but the appraisal agency did not specify his illness. Taxonomic diagnosis is due to insufficient identification materials.
The above-mentioned experts said that Wang’s mental illness had a sudden onset, and he was in a state of mental illness before and at the time of the incident. However, when his mental illness ended is limited by the materials in hand. It was impossible to judge Wang's disappearance of mental symptoms, so Wang was not diagnosed with "acute transient mental disorder". But this has no effect on the conclusion of "limiting criminal liability".
According to the trial situation, the prosecutor, defense, and victim all accepted this appraisal conclusion in court. In addition, based on the investigation of Wang Jijin's blood at the time, drunk driving and drug driving were excluded.
traffic accidentCrime or crime of endangering public safety?
In the trial of this case, the characterization of Wang Ji's conduct, that is, whether he was convicted of the crime of causing traffic accidents or convicted of endangering public safety by dangerous methods, became the focus of the case.
The Paper reporter noted that after the case, the prosecutor approved Wang Jijin's arrest on suspicion of traffic accident. However, the prosecution was later changed. It was believed that Wang Jijin's act of endangering public safety by driving and crashing at high speed should be convicted of endangering public safety by dangerous means and held for criminal responsibility. During the trial, the prosecutor stated that Wang Jijin drove at a super-high speed on urban roads and had exceeded the speed by 225%, that is, 195.2km/h. He ran a red light and drove through busy urban sections. His behavior constituted a serious threat to the lives and property of an unspecified majority. In addition, two people died on the spot and several cars were damaged. Therefore, their behavior objectively meets the constitutive requirements of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods.
From a subjective point of view, when Wang passed the intersection before the incident, his vehicle speed reached 144.5 km/h, and the intersection was 800 meters away from the intersection where the incident occurred. During this time, Wang had sufficient time to take measures to slow down. , But he accelerated to 195.2km/h.
In addition, Wang has lived and worked in Nanjing for a long time and has many years of driving experience. He knew the traffic laws and the speed limit on the road section, but he still violated the law. According to the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law, he knew that his actions would have consequences that would endanger the society, and if such results were allowed to occur, the crime constituted was an intentional crime, so Wang had a laissez-faire subjective intention.
In this regard, Wang Jijin defended himself, saying that now he can clearly realize that driving at a speed of 195.2 km/h will cause unimaginable consequences; but under the conditions at the time, he did not know how fast the car was, nor was he aware of it. Which road to drive on. If you know it, you will take measures to brake or stop. Without his knowledge, he did not make any deceleration measures.
Wang Jijin’s defense attorney also argued that Wang Jijin did not subjectively constituted intentional negligence or a traffic accident. Wang was in a state of mental illness at the time of the incident and was affected by illness that caused the tragedy. In the end, the court held that Wang Jijin’s behavior and the subjective attitude reflected in his behavior did not meet the characteristics of negligence or credulity that could avoid accidents, namely the crime of traffic accidents, and more in line with the constitutive requirements of the crime of endangering public safety by other methods. The defendant Wang Jijin constituted the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means. The
court held that although Wang Jijin was limited in his capacity for liability, he considered that he was not suitable for mitigating punishment and could only be appropriately lightened in accordance with the law, considering the degree of danger of his criminal behavior, the serious consequences, and his failure to actively compensate afterwards. In the end, Wang Jijin was sentenced to the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means and sentenced to 11 years in prison.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-