On September 14, 2021, the Debrecen General Court announced a final decision in the criminal case of the accused who caused a fatal accident while drunk on the main road No. 471.
In the case of the crime of driving while intoxicated causing death, the court of second instance reversed the judgment of the District Court of Debrecen of 2 March 2021 only with regard to the criminal costs, otherwise it upheld the judgment of the first instance.
The court sentenced the man to 4 years in prison, banned him from practicing public affairs for 4 years, and banned him from driving on the road for 5 years.
According to the facts also accepted by the court, the accused was driving alone in his car on the main road No. 471 from Hajdúsámson in the direction of Debrecen at 5:27 a.m. on 19 January 2018. The main road had night vision, but no public lighting, the road surface was uneven and slippery, and its surface was wet, with a maximum speed of 90 km / h on that section. The accused did not exceed the speed limit, drove at 75-80 km / h, also used his seat belt, but due to his inattention and deconcentration due to his moderate intoxication, he slipped the vehicle and the car spun and turned into the opposite lane. The victim moving from Debrecen towards Hajdúsámson noticed the drifting car, but he could no longer prevent the collision. The two cars collided, then the defendant’s car stopped on the grassy road surface, while the victim’s car was pushed back 8.2 meters from the collision. As a result of the accident, the driver of the innocent car suffered such serious injuries that he lost his life at the scene. In the accident, the accused, who was drunk, also suffered serious, life-threatening injuries. At the time of the accident, the defendant was wearing it while the victim was not wearing a seat belt.
In his oral explanation, Dr. Antal Nagy, the chairman of the council, said that the court of first instance complied with the procedural rules governing him, his facts were only slightly incomplete, which the court was able to make up for on the basis of the documents. The chairman of the penal council stressed that the chemist found that the samples were from the accused and that the value of the alcohol concentration was not questioned during the proceedings. Although the blood sample did not meet the professional criteria, according to the data obtained during the procedure and the medical expert, this did not impede his well-founded expert opinion. Thus, the General Court did not consider the motion for the secondment of another medical expert submitted by the defense to be justified.
It was also unquestionable that the accused had consumed alcohol before and not after the accident he had caused. The tribunal fully agreed with the part of the opinion that it was difficult to reconcile with the reality that the first thing a serious, life-threatening injury would be to consume half a liter of 50% house brandy quickly after two or three pulls after the accident. No bottles were visible in the photos on the spot, and those who followed the accident throughout the eye did not see that the accused had consumed alcohol afterward. The emphasis by the defense lawyer on pavement defects as contributing to the accident is irrelevant because it is necessary to drive in accordance with the specifics of the pavement. Dr. Antal Nagy emphasized that the role of a road accident could not have been in this accident!
The tribunal found that the court of first instance had predominantly identified the relevant mitigating and aggravating factors in imposing the sentence. The court imposed a proportionate sentence on the accused in accordance with the purposes of the sentence, in accordance with the principles of sentencing.
The tribunal stressed that drunk driving was an intentional crime. Judge Dr. Antal Nagy stressed that this is one of the most dangerous traffic crimes. When the accused was drunk behind the wheel of a vehicle with an otherwise expired technical license drunk, without a license for committing a previous drunk driving, it reflected a moral behavior that disregarded traffic safety, which should also have manifested itself in the punishment imposed.
The judgment of the Debrecen District Court became final and enforceable.