Catching a thief and reporting the case was sentenced to 12 months in prison, suspended.

After hearing the appeals court sentence him to 12 months of suspended imprisonment, the defendant - the thief - said: "If the court sentences him like that, thieves will run rampant, and no one will dare to catch thieves anymore!"

On the afternoon of September 25, the People's Court of Tay Ninh Province opened an appeal trial for defendant Nguyen Ngoc Anh (63 years old, residing in Ninh Son Ward, Tay Ninh City). Previously, the People's Court of Tay Ninh City sentenced Mr. Anh to 12 months of suspended imprisonment for intentionally causing injury in a state of extreme emotional agitation. Mr. Anh appealed because he believed he was wronged.

Conflicting testimonies

At the appeal hearing, the victim in the case (the thief) Ta Cong Trung (23 years old) and witness Le Minh Thanh (21 years old, both living in Ninh Son ward, Tay Ninh city) were both absent.

Previously, when working with the police, Trung and Thanh had conflicting statements. Trung said that when he was discovered stealing chickens, he ran to the wall to escape, but Mr. Anh stabbed him in the left buttock with a pitchfork. When he tried to run, he was stabbed again in the stomach, and the pitchfork stuck to him. At that time, Trung clung to the fence and screamed for help, but Thanh helped him over the fence. After walking about 20 meters, Trung pulled the pitchfork out of his stomach and fainted, and was taken to the emergency room by Thanh.

But in another testimony, Trung said that when he was discovered, he left the chicken behind, ran to the wall and tried to climb over the fence, but was stabbed in the buttocks by Mr. Anh. Mr. Anh grabbed his belt and pulled him down, then used a pitchfork to stab him in the stomach, leaving the iron rod stuck in his body. After that, Trung clung to the fence and was helped by Thanh to take him to the emergency room.

Witness Thanh also had a contradiction. Initially, Thanh said he saw Trung holding two chickens, with a man holding a long stick behind him, so he shouted, “Hey, man.” Trung dropped the chickens and climbed the wall, but was stabbed in the buttocks by Mr. Anh. At this time, Trung climbed over the fence and was stabbed in the stomach, with the iron stick stuck in his body.

However, in the cross-examination, Thanh said that when he saw Mr. Anh chasing him and stabbing Trung in the buttocks with a pitchfork, he ducked over the fence. Hearing Trung scream, he climbed back up the wall and helped Trung over the fence before going to the hospital for emergency treatment. Thanh did not see the pitchfork stuck in Trung's stomach and could not determine when Trung's abdominal wounds were made.

Mr. Nguyen Ngoc Anh at the appeal hearing. Photo: VU HOI

Stabbed from the stomach up but the wound was from the chest down.

At the appeal hearing, Mr. Anh still asserted that he only stabbed the spear into the thief’s buttocks. Mr. Anh did not admit the indictment that accused him of causing 73% injury to the victim’s abdomen. “The family’s iron fence had spikes that looked like spearheads, so when the victim climbed out, the spikes could have injured the victim…” - defendant Anh stated.

According to defendant Anh, after the thief escaped, he continued to search for him and discovered that he was in the hospital, so he reported it to the police. "The defendant only thought that he went to the police to report the case to deal with the thief, but later the police prosecuted him and said that I went to the police to report the case, which became a circumstance in which I surrendered."

Defending the defendant, lawyer Dinh Thai Hoang presented many details proving that Trung's testimony had many contradictions with the testimony of the defendant and the witness. The crime scene examination report and the investigation experiment report were not enough to determine that the defendant Anh caused the abdominal wound. The wounds on the victim's body were not the same and the authorities still could not clarify the weapon. The expert conclusion could not determine the mechanism of the wound formation but still convicted the defendant, which was not enough basis...

In addition, the lawyer argued that the wall had a high iron fence 2.3 meters above the ground, Mr. Anh ran towards it with a pitchfork and slipped, the tip of the pitchfork stabbed the thief's butt. When the thief climbed the horizontal iron bar below the high fence, it would be 2.78 meters above the ground, defendant Anh standing below could not have stabbed the thief in the stomach, and if he had, the wound would have been from the lower abdomen up to the chest. However, the most serious wound in the abdomen was from the upper chest down. So it cannot be said that this wound was caused by defendant Anh. From there, the lawyer requested the panel of judges to declare defendant Anh innocent.

After deliberation, the panel of judges concluded that the content of the defendant Anh’s appeal had no basis for consideration. Therefore, the court upheld the 12-month suspended sentence for defendant Anh, and ordered the defendant to compensate the victim 74 million VND.

After hearing the verdict, Mr. Anh said: "The Tay Ninh Province Court of Appeal's decision is unjust, causing damage to me and my family. If this happens, it will create conditions for thieves to commit crimes because people will not dare to catch thieves for fear of being prosecuted and falling into prison..."

According to PLO