On February 9, 2022, the Liaoning Provincial High People's Court publicly pronounced a second-instance judgment on the Dalian 5.22 BMW collision escape case, rejecting the appeal of defendant Liu Dong and upholding the original judgment. On October 29, 2021, the Intermediate People's Court of Dalian City, Liaoning Province, found defendant Liu Dong guilty of endangering public safety by dangerous means in a first-instance judgment and sentenced him to death and deprived of his political rights for life.
The Modern Express reporter noted that in this case, the defendant Liu Dong's crime was "endangering public safety by dangerous means", not "intentional homicide" or "traffic accident crime". In this regard, the lawyer analyzed that this is because in this case, Liu Dong retaliated against society in an extreme way, endangering social public safety and causing serious consequences.
△ Results of the second-instance judgment
After the investment failed to retaliate against the society, Dalian men deliberately ran a red light and killed pedestrians and were sentenced to death
On February 9, 2022, the Higher People's Court of Liaoning Province publicly pronounced a second-instance judgment on the appellant Liu Dong's case of endangering public safety by dangerous means, ruling to reject the appeal, upholding the original judgment, and reporting to the Supreme People's Court for approval of Liu Dong's death sentence in accordance with law.
On May 22, 2021, Liu Dong was driving a BMW sedan while driving, suddenly accelerated and deliberately ran a red light, crashing into pedestrians who were crossing the road, causing five deaths, two serious injuries, four minor injuries, and two injuries. It was followed by a rear-end van, which he abandoned and fled. On October 29 of the same year, the court ruled in the first instance that defendant Liu Dong had committed the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means, and sentenced him to death and deprived of his political rights for life. After the verdict was pronounced, Liu Dong was not satisfied and appealed.
△ Public video footage
According to the information publicly released by the Liaoning Higher People's Court, the court of second instance held in open court that Liu Dong, because of the failure of his investment, vented his emotions in an extreme way, drove and accelerated on the public roads in the central area of the city, deliberately ran a red light, and collided with pedestrians who were crossing the road on the sidewalk, causing many deaths, injuries, and property losses to others, the means were particularly cruel, the circumstances were particularly bad, the consequences were particularly serious, the criminal motives were extremely despicable, and the social harm and crimes were extremely serious. The facts determined by the court of first instance are clear, the conviction is accurate, and the sentence is appropriate.
Lawyer explains why the crime was convicted of "endangering public safety by dangerous means"
In this case, the court ruled that Liu Dong had committed the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means. Why not intentional homicide? What are the offences of endangering public security by dangerous means?
Chen Kai of Beijing Gaopeng (Nanjing) Law Firm introduced that the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means refers to the intentional or negligent acts that endanger the lives, health, property and lives of an unspecified majority of people, aimed at the safety of life, property and public safety of people's lives. Intentional homicide refers to the intentional and unlawful deprivation of the life of another person, which is directed at the right to life. In contrast, the former is more harmful.
△ 5.22 Incident Notification
Combined with this case, Liu Dong used extreme ways to vent his emotions and retaliate against society because of the failure of investment, and the object of his revenge was not a specific person. In the process, he drove a red light in the public road area of the city, rushing into pedestrians, the victim is an unspecified group of people, he endangers the public safety of society.
Chen Kai added that from the perspective of sentencing, whoever endangers public safety by dangerous means and has not yet caused serious consequences shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years; if he causes serious injury or death or causes serious losses to public or private property, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than ten years, life imprisonment or death. Whoever commits a crime by negligence shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years; if the circumstances are less serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention. It can be seen that the sentencing for this crime is from low to high, and once it causes serious consequences, the sentencing is very strict.
The penalty for intentional homicide, on the other hand, is from the highest to the lowest, with the death penalty, life imprisonment or fixed-term imprisonment of not less than ten years;
As for whether the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means is intentional or negligent, the subjective mentality of the suspect must be judged on the basis of evidence such as records and police investigation results.
So why not the crime of causing a traffic accident? Chen Kai introduced that the subjective aspect of the traffic accident is manifested as negligence, which belongs to the crime of negligence, which is not intended to be constituted, but overconfident, thinks that it can be avoided, or is negligent and does not notice, causing a traffic accident and constituting a traffic accident. For example, he said: "For example, after getting drunk, he knew that a scratch had occurred, but he still indulged his own behavior, continued to drive, causing major social harm, then it constituted the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means." ”