In media
Three different expertises concerning the speed in accident in Duvanište
The trial continues, and the results of the expertise have not been announced even today; photo: N.M.
The expected results of examination of sanity and maturity of the driver of the Audi who span out onto the sidewalk and killed a 12 year old boy and a 45 year old men weren’t heard during today’s court proceedings. They will be heard during the next hearing, from three members of the committee who participated in the examination, and the court might also decide whether a committee will be giving an expertise on the speed of the Audi using a computer simulation.
The lawyers and the accused received the results of the examination of the forensic medicine experts only before today’s hearing, and they were turned to the court yesterday afternoon, which was the reason why we didn’t hear today if the experts found the 19 year old driver of the Audi N.S. mature and sane for his age.
The public will have to wait for the results until the next hearing, which is scheduled for June 1st at 9.a.m, when the court might order a new expertise on the speed at which N.S. was driving before and at the moment of the accident.
Lawyers of the families Bratislav Stojanović and Oliver Injac have just today received the results of the expertise of the maturity and sanity of the driver; photo: N.M.
There are multiple suggestions at which speed was the car going when the accident happend – the indictment states 131 km/h, the injured parties lawyers state that the computer simulations they initiated found the speed of 152 km/h, while the defense attorney states that the speed was much lower than the previous ones.
Speed at which the car was going was mentioned on several occasions during this trial, because, as the lawyers of the injured parties stated before, the punishment is 2 to 12 years in prison instead of 1 to 8.
However, the expert of the defense Milan Božović stated that the defense found the speed of the Audi of 108 km/h, and that they took into consideration that the car went over three surfaces – road, grass and the cycling track, and over the curb before that.
“If we use the rules from The Manual for traffic expertises, we get the speed of 108 km/h” – explained Božović.
He added that the original traffic expertise doesn’t have any material evidence, so they couldn’t determine where the Audi got destabilized, or the way the Audi was going before the first braking marks, as well as the cause of the accident.
Lawyer of the family of the 45 year old who died in the accident, Oliver Injac, reacted to the information of the new speed.
Even if 108 km/h was the speed in the city, where the speed limit is 60 km/h, on slippery road, is that slow – said Injac.
After the defense expert, the traffic expert was questioned, whose expertise was the main topic of today’s hearing. He reiterated his expertise, as well that he was not able to use the computer program to similate the accident.
Both pedestrians passed away, and even today, all the details about the accident before the court are not known; photo: JV
He pointed out that the accident could have been avoided if the Audi was driven at the speed limit of 60 km/h, as well that even at the speed of 108 km/h, having in mind the length of the braking marks up until the place that the Audi left the road, the driver would have had the possibility of stoping.
For the lawyer Bratislav Stojanović, it’s impossible that the expert who has 25 years of experience, couldn’t determine how the accident happened, having all the evidence, but uses the term “I think”.
The experts have a categorization of the strength of their findings, and when they use the term “I think” that means that their expertise is not binding for the court. It’s missing the most basic information, we all know that the accident wouldn’t have happened if the Audi was going according to the speed limit. The expert used the term “I find” which is binding for the court. For everything else, he uses the term “I think” – said Stojanović.
This is why Stojanović is still demanding that a new expertise is ordered, where the experts will use the proper terminology, because, as he states, simulation of the accident can be easily done. The court will decide whether it will accept his request, against which is the defense attorney Saša Knežević
However, he himself stated that the expert was very broad, and that he started the expertise off the wrong foot and ended up with the wrong calculation.
It’s clear that speed is absolutely not the cause of the accident. The expert confirmed today that he doesn’t have concrete evidence to determine what caused the spining, which is the beginning of the accident, not what happened at the end – added Knežević.
The 19-year-old is still in custody after the hearing; photo: N.M.
Next hearing is scheduled for June 1st at 9 a.m. and the accused will be brought from custody.
We remind you that the driver of the Audi is being tried for hitting two pedestrians on the side of the road on January 4th, who tragically died. The court proceedings began in March, and he has been in custody since January 5th.
There are demands to increase traffic safety in the city, to prevent similar tragedies, and to increase punishments for such accidents, because the belief is that the punishment of 8 years in prison is not enough, which is the reason there were several protest in Niš – at the site of the accident, through the streets of Niš, as well as recently in front of the Court’s building.
Before today’s hearing, there were those in which girls who were in the car at the time of the accident testified, whose testimonies were different. On the third hearing, seven police officers testified on the behavior od the driver right after the accident, some of which were in the patrol that had arrived first to the site of the accident.