CASE LAW NO. 59/2023/AL

On indirect intention in the case of “Murder”

Approved by the Judicial Council of the Supreme People’s Court on February 1^st, 2^nd, and 3^rd, 2023, and published under Decision No. 39/QĐ-CA on February 24^th, 2023, of the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court.

Source of the Case Law:

The Appellate Criminal Judgment No. 50/2020/HS-PT dated December 10^th, 2020, of the People’s Court of Yên Bái Province regarding the case of “Murder” involving the defendants Triệu Văn M and Đặng Văn T.

Location of the Case Law’s Content:

Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the “Court’s Opinion” section.

Summary of the Case Law:

– Case Background:

The defendant used a dangerous weapon to attack the victim. The victim fled on a motorcycle, and the defendant continued to chase, causing the victim to fear and accelerate. When the victim had an accident, the defendant ceased the chase. The victim died on the way to the hospital.

– Legal Resolution:

In this case, the defendant must bear criminal liability for the crime of “Murder” with indirect intention.

Relevant Legal Provisions:

Article 123 of the 2015 Penal Code (amended and supplemented in 2017).

Keywords:

“Murder”; “Indirect intention”; “Fleeing on a motorcycle”; “Victim had an accident”.

CASE DETAILS

According to the documents in the case file and the proceedings at the trial, the case is summarized as follows:

On the evening of September 6^th, 2019, Triệu Văn M and Đặng Văn T attended a wedding in K Hamlet, T Commune, Y District, Yên Bái Province. At the wedding, M saw Nguyễn Ngọc V with Nguyễn Thị L, born in 2004, residing in T Hamlet, N Commune, B District, Yên Bái Province. Previously, M had been beaten by youths from C Commune when he was playing there, so upon seeing V, who was from C Commune, M urged T, “Let’s beat that guy V”. Because earlier, T had met and offered V a drink, but V refused, making T feel disrespected, he agreed and said, “Watch him and let me know when he leaves”.

Around 8 p.m the same day, Nguyễn Ngọc V took his motorcycle with Nguyễn Thị L riding along and left via the inter-Hamlet road. T and M also took their motorcycles, each on a separate bike, following with the intent to beat V. T asked M, “Do you have the stuff?” M replied, “I have it,” and M asked T, “Do you have anything?” T replied, “I have”. After chasing for about 500 meters, they overtook V’s motorcycle.

At a deserted road section in D Hamlet, T Commune, Y District, Yên Bái Province, M and T stopped and blocked V’s motorcycle. T opened the trunk of his motorcycle, took out a bag containing a metal baton (a type of three-section metal stick with a black handle, maximum length when extended is 64 cm, retracted length is 24 cm, diameter is 2.5 cm, and the tip is round with a diameter of 1.5 cm) and wore it.

When V and L got off the motorcycle, M said, “Why are you leaving so quickly?” and T said, “Yesterday, I offered you a drink, but you didn’t drink. Do you look down on me?” V replied, “Yesterday, you guys beat me up”. As soon as V finished speaking, M lunged and punched V in the face multiple times, and they wrestled and fought on the road. M sat on top of V and punched him in the face while T kicked V’s legs twice. At this moment, V managed to get up and punched M in the face, so M grabbed V and pushed him into the roadside talus.

T took the baton from his bag and struck V’s left arm. M also took out a baton he was carrying (a type of three-section metal stick with a black handle, maximum length when extended is 31 cm, diameter is 1.0 cm) and struck V’s chest. M continued to strike V once more from left to right, top to bottom, hitting V’s face, then struck V three more times on the body, causing him to drop the baton at the scene.

In pain, V ran back towards the wedding venue, and M chased after, grabbing V’s shirt but V broke free. Then T came close and struck V’s back with the metal baton before V ran away. T and M returned to their motorcycles, started them, and continued the search with headlights on. At this point, L also went searching and found V lying on the roadside about 100 meters from where he was beaten.

V told L, “I’m very tired, I’m exhausted”. When seeing the headlights of T and M’s motorcycles approaching, V stood up with L’s help and they walked towards V’s motorcycle. At this moment, T and M turned their motorcycles around, saw V starting his motorcycle and riding with L for about 2 meters before T and M accelerated in pursuit. Seeing this, V also accelerated to escape.

While chasing, T still held the metal baton, and M shouted, “Damn you motherf**ker, stop right there!” After about 100 meters, T fell off his motorcycle, and M continued the chase alone. When they reached a downhill section, seeing V riding at high speed, L patted V’s shoulder, warning, “Go slower”, but V did not respond and did not slow down.

When they reached an intersection (about 1,300 meters from the area where T and M beat V) in Hamlet 4, T Commune, Y District, V failed to control his motorcycle and crashed into the yard of Mr. Phạm Văn H’s house and fell. M saw this, turned his motorcycle around, met T, and said, “V crashed”. They then left together. Nguyễn Ngọc V was taken to the hospital by locals but died shortly afterward.

According to the Forensic Examination Report No. 79/TT dated September 13^th, 2019, by the Forensic Center of Yên Bái Province, the conclusion was:

– Cause of Nguyễn Ngọc V’s death: Complex fracture of the skull box in the right temporal region.

– Mechanism of injury formation: Skull fracture in the right temporal region caused by a strong impact with a blunt object with a large surface area in a direct direction.

In the Injury Examination Report No. 112/TgT, dated October 14^th, 2019, the Forensic Center of Yên Bái Province concluded:

– Abrasions on the right parietal region: 1%;

– Bruising on the skin around the right eye: 1%;

– Abrasions on the skin of the nasal wing and right cheek: 1%;

– Abrasions on the middle chest area below the sternoclavicular joint: 1%;

– Bruising on the skin of the right chest under the nipple: 0%;

– Bruising on the skin of the right elbow: 1%;

– Abrasions and bruising on the skin of the back of the right hand: 0%;

– Abrasions on the skin of the thigh, knee, and back of the right foot: 0%.

– The total bodily injury rate of Nguyễn Ngọc V at the time of the examination through photographic evidence was: 5% (five percent).

The scene examination results determined: The area at the intersection where Nguyễn Ngọc V and Nguyễn Thị L fell was a 3.5-meter wide intersection without a median strip, with black tire skid marks on the road surface; there was a bloodstain of indistinct shape (size 0.3 x 0.2 meters) on a tarpaulin covering a dry tree stump (size 0.53 x 0.34 meters) in the garden of Mr. Phạm Văn H (adjacent to the road).

During the preliminary investigation, the families of the defendants Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M voluntarily compensated the family of the victim Nguyễn Ngọc V with an amount of VND 80,000,000.

In the First-instance Criminal Judgment No. 22/2020/HS-ST dated September 16^th, 2020, of the People’s Court of Trấn Yên District, Yên Bái Province, it was decided:

1. Regarding the charges: Declared that the defendants Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M were guilty of “Intentionally Causing Injury”.
2. Regarding the penalties: Pursuant to Point a, Clause 4, Article 134; Points b, s, Clause 1, Article 51; Point d, Clause 1, Article 52 of the Penal Code, sentenced defendant Đặng Văn T to 14 years imprisonment, starting from the date of temporary detention on November 8^th, 2019; sentenced defendant Triệu Văn M to 14 years imprisonment, starting from the date of temporary detention on November 8^th, 2019.
3. Regarding civil liability: Pursuant to Articles 584, 585, 589, 590, 591, 357, and Clause 2, Article 468 of the Civil Code, ordered defendants Triệu Văn M and Đặng Văn T to jointly compensate Mr. Nguyễn Văn T1 and Ms. Triệu Thị L1 an amount of VND 6,340,000. The portion for defendant T is VND 3,170,000, and the portion for defendant M is VND 3,170,000.

Additionally, the first-instance judgment also determined the civil liability of the defendants towards Ms. Nguyễn Thị L, addressed the handling of evidence, court fees, and the right to appeal for the defendants; and recommended that the People’s Court of Yên Bái Province issue a document requesting the Chief Justice of the High People’s Court to appeal and vacate the First-instance Criminal Judgment No. 22/2020/HS-ST dated September 16^th, 2020, of the People’s Court of Trấn Yên District, Yên Bái Province, for reinvestigation, prosecution, and trial on the charge of “Murder” as stipulated in Article 123 of the Penal Code.

– On September 19^th, 2020, the legal representatives of the victim Nguyễn Ngọc V, Mr. Nguyễn Văn T1 and Mr. Triệu Thị L1, appealed, disagreeing with the charges and requesting an increase in compensation.

– On October 1^st, 2020, defendants Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M appealed, requesting a reduction in the sentence.

In the Appellate Appeal Decision No. 02/QĐ-VKSTY dated September 29^th, 2020, by the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Trấn Yên District, Yên Bái Province, it was requested to reduce the sentence for defendant Đặng Văn T.

At the appellate trial, defendants Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M admitted all the actions as described in the first-instance judgment. The defendants maintained their appeals for sentence reduction and did not accept an increase in compensation.

The defense counsel for the defendants agreed with the charges and the articles applied by the first-instance court but argued that the sentences for the defendants were too harsh and requested a reduction in the sentences because the defendants had many mitigating circumstances.

The counsel for the victim argued that they did not agree with the charges the first-instance court had applied to the defendants and requested the appellate court to sentence the defendants to life imprisonment for the crime of “Murder” according to Point n, Clause 1, Article 193 of the Penal Code, and to increase the compensation, requiring the defendants to compensate the victim’s legal representatives a total amount of VND 421,000,000, acknowledging that the defendants’ families had already compensated VND 80,000,000.

The procurator presented the opinion that the first-instance court’s judgment, which sentenced defendants Triệu Văn M and Đặng Văn T for the crime of “Intentionally Causing Injury” according to Point a, Clause 4, Article 134 of the Penal Code, was well-founded.

However, the first-instance judgment’s evaluation of the defendants’ roles in the crime was inaccurate, as defendant Đặng Văn T was merely instigated and performed less decisive actions than defendant Triệu Văn M. Therefore, the appeal of the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Trấn Yên District requesting a reduction of the sentence for defendant T was justifiable.

The appeal for a reduction in the sentence for defendant Triệu Văn M and the appeal for changing the charges and increasing the sentence by the victim’s legal representatives were not justifiable.

Regarding civil liability: It was proposed that the appellate court partially accept the appeal of the victim’s legal representatives, increasing the compensation for emotional distress by VND 100,000,000, while other compensation amounts resolved by the first-instance court were appropriate according to legal regulations and should be upheld.

It was proposed to base on Point b, Clause 1, Article 355; Point b, Clause 1, Point b, Clause 2, Article 357 of the Penal Procedure Code, to accept the appeal of the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Trấn Yên District and the appeal of defendant Đặng Văn T; not accept the appeal of defendant Triệu Văn M;

partially accept the appeal of the victim’s legal representatives, and amend the First-instance Criminal Judgment No. 22/2020/HS-ST dated September 16^th, 2020, of the People’s Court of Trấn Yên District, Yên Bái Province, by reducing the sentence for defendant Đặng Văn T and increasing the compensation for emotional distress for the victim’s legal representatives.

The defendants, defense counsel, and the counsel of the victim maintained their respective opinions. When given the final word, the defendants requested leniency in their sentences.

COURT’S OPINION:

[1] Based on the case’s content and the documents in the case file that were contested at the trial, the Trial Panel considers as follows:

[2] The appeals by the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Trấn Yên District, the defendants, and the legitimate representative of the victim were filed in proper form, within the statutory period, and are eligible for appellate review.

[3] The testimony at the appellate trial by defendants Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M is mutually corroborative and consistent with other evidence in the case file, including the statements of Nguyễn Thị L, forensic findings, scene investigation reports, and seized materials. 

This collective evidence establishes a sufficient basis to conclude: At approximately 8:00 p.m on December 20^th, 2018, Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M used their hands and feet to punch and kick, then used a metal rod to repeatedly strike Nguyễn Ngọc V on the head, face, arms, ribs, and back. When V attempted to escape by motorcycle, T and M pursued V on a motorcycle at speeds over 50 km/h. T carried a metal rod while M shouted, “Damn you motherf**ker, stop right there!”

Faced with this terrifying pursuit, V understandably accelerated in a desperate attempt to flee. Tragically, at the intersection in Hamlet 4, T Commune, Y District, V lost control due to the high speed and hazardous conditions. He veered off the road into an empty lot and crashed. Despite immediate efforts, V succumbed to his injuries en route to the hospital.

[4] The actions of T and M demonstrate a blatant disregard for human life. Their use of a metal rod, a dangerous weapon, against V’s head, face, and body was undeniably vicious. Their subsequent pursuit on a motorcycle at excessive speed further compounded the danger. V, already suffering from the beating, was forced to flee on a poorly lit village road with sharp turns and steep sections – a recipe for disaster. T and M, aware of these perilous conditions, continued their relentless pursuit for a staggering 1,300 meters until the inevitable crash occurred.

While T and M may not have explicitly desired V’s death, their actions speak volumes. They were demonstrably conscious of the high likelihood of a fatal outcome and yet continued their pursuit. This recklessness, coupled with their initial brutal assault, directly led to V’s death.

[5] Consequently, there exists ample grounds to conclude that defendants T and M committed the offense of “Murder” with indirect intent. The initial investigation, prosecution, and trial of the defendants for “Intentional Causing Injury” were inaccurately adjudicated. Therefore, the first-instance judgment must be vacated to initiate proceedings for a more severe charge under Point a, Clause 1, Article 358 of the Penal Procedure Code.

[6] During the first-instance trial, the People’s Court of Trấn Yên District remanded the case for further investigation due to evidence suggesting the defendants’ actions constituted “Murder.” However, the People’s Procuracy of Trấn Yên District upheld the charge of “Intentional Causing Injury”, prompting the first-instance court to proceed within its jurisdiction and recommend appellate review of the judgment. Accordingly, the first-instance court bears no responsibility for the appellate court’s decision to vacate the first-instance judgment.

[7] Given the vacatur of the first-instance judgment for re-investigation, appeals and objections regarding penalties and civil liabilities will be addressed during the re-investigation, prosecution, and trial of the case

[8] As a result of the foregoing, neither the defendants nor the legitimate representative of the victim are liable for appellate court fees.

In light of the foregoing,

IT IS DECIDED:

Pursuant to Point c, Clause 1, Clause 2 of Article 355; Point a, Clause 1, Article 358 of the Penal Procedure Code,

1. To vacate the First-instance Criminal Judgment No. 22/2020/HS-ST dated September 16^th, 2020, of the People’s Court of Trấn Yên District, Yên Bái Province for re-investigation. Remand the case file to the People’s Procuracy of Yên Bái Province for resolution in accordance with the law.
2. Regarding court fees: Pursuant toPoint f, Clause 2, Article 23 of Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 dated December 30^th, 2016, of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly on court fees and charges, the defendants and the legitimate representative of the victim are not required to pay appellate court fees.

The appellate criminal judgment takes effect from the date of pronouncement.

CONTENT OF THE CASE LAW:

“[3] The testimony at the appellate trial by defendants Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M is mutually corroborative and consistent with other evidence in the case file, including the statements of Nguyễn Thị L, forensic findings, scene investigation reports, and seized materials. 

This collective evidence establishes a sufficient basis to conclude: At approximately 8:00 p.m on December 20^th, 2018, Đặng Văn T and Triệu Văn M used their hands and feet to punch and kick, then used a metal rod to repeatedly strike Nguyễn Ngọc V on the head, face, arms, ribs, and back. When V attempted to escape by motorcycle, T and M pursued V on a motorcycle at speeds over 50 km/h. T carried a metal rod while M shouted, “Damn you motherf**ker, stop right there!”

Faced with this terrifying pursuit, V understandably accelerated in a desperate attempt to flee. Tragically, at the intersection in Hamlet 4, T Commune, Y District, V lost control due to the high speed and hazardous conditions. He veered off the road into an empty lot and crashed. Despite immediate efforts, V succumbed to his injuries en route to the hospital.

[4] The actions of T and M demonstrate a blatant disregard for human life. Their use of a metal rod, a dangerous weapon, against V’s head, face, and body was undeniably vicious. Their subsequent pursuit on a motorcycle at excessive speed further compounded the danger. V, already suffering from the beating, was forced to flee on a poorly lit village road with sharp turns and steep sections – a recipe for disaster. T and M, aware of these perilous conditions, continued their relentless pursuit for a staggering 1,300 meters until the inevitable crash occurred.

While T and M may not have explicitly desired V’s death, their actions speak volumes. They were demonstrably conscious of the high likelihood of a fatal outcome and yet continued their pursuit. This recklessness, coupled with their initial brutal assault, directly led to V’s death.

[5] Consequently, there exists ample grounds to conclude that defendants T and M committed the offense of “Murder” with indirect intent…”

If you need more consulting, please Contact Us at TNHH NT International Law Firm (ntpartnerlawfirm.com)

You can also download the .docx version here.