Expensive lesson for hooliganism

“Talking” with guns

The trial of defendant Ha Van Hoang (32 years old), residing in Chau Hong commune, Quy Chau district, for the crime ofKillingThere were quite a few people in attendance. The two victims in the case were also present in the courtroom. The defendant and the victim knew each other, but because of a small conflict in life, Hoang took out a gun and shot, injuring two people.

It is worth mentioning that before being involved in this case, Hoang had also been administratively punished by the Quy Hop district police for his act of harming the health of others. Having stumbled once, the father of two continued to act angrily and hooliganistically, leading to the shooting that caused a stir in public opinion.

Defendant Ha Van Hoang. Photo: Tran Vu

According to the case file, at around 1:00 a.m. on October 25, 2022, after playing billiards and drinking beer, Hoang and a friend went to eat porridge at night. A while later, a group of young men including Luong Van Chau (born in 2002), Sam Van T. (born in 1995), Luong Van C. (born in 2003)... also came to the porridge shop. Because they were friends, Hoang invited this group to sit down and drink alcohol.

Here, Chau remembered Hoang often took out a gun to threaten him, so he texted Hoang to provoke him. When Chau looked, Hoang said: "Are you going to hit me?" and then the two started fighting. Sitting nearby, Sam Van T. stood up and punched Hoang in the face. After being stopped, Hoang rode his motorbike home to get a hunting gun (air gun) and 4 lead bullets and returned to the shop to shoot the group of opponents.

However, when he arrived at the restaurant, everyone had dispersed, so Hoang left. After walking a short distance, Hoang saw T.'s group stopping at an intersection, so he stopped, took out his gun and shot T. once in the back. After being shot, T. ran to call his friends for help, but they couldn't, so he took out two knives to deal with Hoang.

After firing the first bullet, Hoang fired the second bullet, which grazed Mr. C's chest, so the third shot hit Mr. C's neck. Hoang continued to load the fourth bullet into the gun, but when he saw Mr. Chau and Mr. T. running away, he stopped shooting.

Hoang rode his motorbike through the intersection and saw Mr. C. lying injured on the side of the road (from a gunshot wound). He continued to hit the victim with his motorbike and then went home to tell his mother that he had shot someone.

In the morning of the same day, Hoang turned himself in to the police, handing over the gun and 43 lead bullets. Authorities determined that Mr. T. was shot once in the back with a 2% injury, and Mr. C. was hit by two bullets causing a 9% injury.

The victim accepts part of the blame.

At the trial, the defendant confessed to the crime. Hoang said he only held the gun to threaten people and did not intend to kill them. However, when the jury asked, “If you were threatening, why did you aim at someone and shoot instead of shooting into the air or moving to the sides?”, Hoang admitted that he had fired the gun because he was angry and could not control himself.

The victim attended the trial and asked for a reduced sentence for the defendant. Photo: Tran Vu

Regarding the origin of the gun, Hoang confessed that he bought it from an unknown person in Quy Hop district for 3 million VND for his own use. The defendant said he bought the lead bullets on social media.

Speaking in court, the victims said that the cause of the incident was partly due to the victims, which led to the defendant's actions. The victims expressed remorse for their somewhat inappropriate behavior.

Before the trial, the victims filed a petition for a reduced sentence for the defendant. At the trial, the defendants also filed a petition for a reduced sentence for defendant Hoang. Regarding the civil matter, before the trial, the defendant had made compensation payments to the victims. The two victims did not request anything, so the court did not consider it.

The panel of judges determined that the defendant Hoang’s actions had seriously affected human life, so a strict sentence was needed for general deterrence and prevention. The gun the defendant used to shoot people could have caused injury or death. If the two victims had not received timely emergency care, their lives could have been in danger.

However, after the incident, the defendant turned himself in, honestly confessed his actions with an attitude of repentance and reformation. The defendant influenced the family to remedy the consequences for the victims. After considering the entire case, the panel sentenced defendant Ha Van Hoang to 12 years in prison for the crime of “Murder”.

The sentence was announced, Hoang will have long days behind bars to think, regret what he has done, to be able to reform and reintegrate into society when his prison term is over. A valuable lesson for Hoang and a warning for those who disregard the law, resolving conflicts through violence.