CRIME OF MANSLAUGHTER BY TAXI (TCK 85)
The crime of killing a person by taxi is a crime regulated in Article 85 of the Turkish Criminal Code (TCK).
This crime is considered to have been committed if the person acted contrary to his duty of attention and care, inadvertently causing the death of another person. Taxation is a situation that occurs not intentionally (knowingly and willingly), but for reasons such as negligence, carelessness, imprudence or violation of professional rules.
Elements of the Crime of Manslaughter by Taxiree:
1. perpetrator: The person who committed the crime can be anyone. The perpetrator is usually people who have a certain obligation (driving a car, doing business, etc.).
2. Taxidermy Movement: The main element of the crime is the excoriated act. This is when the perpetrator involuntarily leads to the result of death, not complying with the obligation of attention and care. For example, situations such as driving a car without complying with traffic rules or neglecting occupational safety rules are considered in this scope.
3. Sequel (Conclusion) :A person must die as a result of the retaliatory act. The consequence of death is mandatory for the accomplishment of the crime of human murder by default.
4. Causality Tie: There must be a causal link between the outcome of death and the estimated action of the perpetrator. That is, the careless or imprudent behavior of the perpetrator should be the direct cause of death.
Deadline for Complaint for Manslaughter by Taxpayer
The crime of manslaughter by taxi is not a impeachable offense. As soon as the prosecution learns that the crime has been committed, it re-investigates the perpetrator and opens a public case.The statute of limitations for the case is 15 years. That is, if within 15 years the case is notified of the existence of this crime, a lawsuit is filed. Otherwise, he will not be able to sue because of the statute of limitations.
Criminal Sanctions:
A person who commits the crime of manslaughter by instalment in accordance with Article 85 of the TCK:
• Punished with imprisonment from 2 years to 6 years.
• If the crime has caused the death of more than one person or the injury of more than one person with the death of one person, a prison sentence of 2 years to 15 years is imposed.
Aggravating Causes:
Some situations can lead to an increase in the penalty. For example:
· The form of commission of the crime, the fact that the perpetrator acted with conscious aphorism (although he predicted the outcome),
· The commission of a crime by an official engaged in public service by abuse of his duty.
Conscious Taxier:
If the perpetrator predicted the outcome of death but did not want it, there is a consciousness taxia. In the case of deliberate taxation, the penalty is increased by a third of the impossibility of killing a human being by taxi.
Examples of Crimes of Manslaughter by Taxation:
· In traffic accidents, the driver hits a pedestrian and causes his death as a result of carelessness or non-compliance with the rules.
· The death of a worker in an accident at work due to failure to take occupational safety measures.
· When a doctor causes his patient to die as a result of not following professional rules.
Against the perpetrator who committed the crime of causing death by installments, the relatives of the victim (mother, father, spouse, children, siblings, etc.) have the right to file a lawsuit for material and moral compensation.
Court in Charge of Causing Death by Taxation or Deliberate Taxation
Guilty of causing death by taxi, that is, whether the act was committed by general assessment or by conscious assessment, in the event of the death of a person, the ordinary criminal court is designated as the competent court (5235 SK article 12).
However, if at least 1 injury or 2 deaths occurred as a result of the imputed act together with at least 1 death, the trial of the assessed crime will be carried out by the heavy criminal court.
Despite the fact that death and injuries occurred as a result of the act committed by the taxi, the injured have abandoned the complaint during the investigation phase, and if there is only one death in the incident, the competent court will again be the ordinary criminal court.
Supreme Court Decisions on the Crime of Causing Death by Taxpayer
How to Cause Death by Conscious Taxi in a Traffic Accident
“... the defendant...” On 08.07.2013 at 17.30, while driving with a car under the control of a 3-lane, 11-meter-wide road, where the maximum speed limit is 50 km/h, in the residential area, while passing through the intersection with a red light at the intersection with a traffic light, passing through the pedestrian lane on the right side of the road while passing through the intersection with a red light... ' Tracranial (intracranial) blood caused by trauma to the head and neck trauma suffered by the vehicle, which struck the bicycle he was driving in the left lane, when M. C. jumped 30 meters forward as a result of the impact, leaving a brake mark of 30 meters between the point of impact and the place where the passenger fell. The defendant, who claimed that he died at the scene of the crime as a result of the prosecution, was travelling at a speed of 60-70 km/h during the incident at the time of the incident, that the speed of the defendant at the time of the incident was approximately 70km/h in relation to the braking and stopping distances, the witness said... In which the defendant, seeing the yellow light on, declares that the defendant increased his speed so as not to be caught in the red light, that the defendant acted in a conscious taxi by committing a red light violation and that he was actually completely defective, that there was no fault of the client, the Local Court “the manner in which the crime was committed, the place, the time, the gravity, the significance... the manner in which the incident occurred, on the grounds that the deceased was “very young”, according to Article 85/1 of the TCK, the basic sentence is set at 6 years' imprisonment, and on the grounds that “the manner of the incident occurred, the deceased was of a very young age” in the event that the basic sentence was increased by half in accordance with Article 22/3 of the TCK due to deliberate taxi; although the reason given by the Local Court during the determination of both the basic sentence and the increase rate is not a legal justification, but that the defendant was driving at a speed of approximately 40% above the speed limit in the place where the speed limit is 50 km/h When approaching the intersection, he should slow down and stop at a red light, and instead increase his speed when he has to stop at a red light and, in fact, a red light. when considering together the factors of causing the event resulting in the death of a person, the manner in which the offence was committed, the manner in which the offence was committed, the place where the offence was committed, the gravity of the damage incurred and the defendant's fault based on the assessment of the charge, the determination of the basic sentence as a sentence of 6 years' imprisonment in accordance with Article 85/1 of the TCK, again Although this constitutes a single conscious taxi in the form of passing a red light, a defendant who is well above the legal speed limit must reduce his speed as he approaches the intersection. The principle of “proportionality” in Article 3 of the TCK, which provides for an increase of up to one third in the basic penalty in accordance with Article 22/3 of the TCK, which provides for an increase in the rate of half according to the manner in which the situation is carried out which constitutes a conscious assessment by entering the intersection by increasing it, is not violated. must be accepted. Accordingly, it should be decided to approve the decision of resistance of the Local Court in accordance with the procedure and the law...” (Criminal General Assembly of the Supreme Court T.15.01.2019, 2017/701 E., 2019/6K.)
Causing Death by Taxi as a Result of a Car Accident- County Link
“H.. Ç.. ' If a craniectomy and lobectomy were performed due to a parietal collapse fracture after a car accident on 25.02.2010, he was discharged from the hospital on 05.05.2010, he died at his home on 08.06.2010. The report on the autopsy conducted by the Adana Forensic Medicine Group Presidency found whether there was a link between the cause of death and the traffic accident he had suffered that it is appropriate to receive an opinion from the relevant Specialized Board of the Presidium of the Forensic Medicine Authority by sending all the forensic investigation files and treatment documents in the matter to (Istanbul) Although it is stated, whether there is a direct link between the action of the defendant and the death of the Forensic Medical Board, without a report from the Special Office, the provision of a judgment in writing with incomplete investigation is contrary to the Law, and for this reason the appeal of the defendant's defense is considered to be in place, for this reason the judgment number 5320 To be DEGRADED in accordance with the request in accordance with Article 321 of the CMUK No. 1412, which is still in force in accordance with Article 8 of the Law...” (12th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, T. 27/03/2014, 2013/15520 E., 2014/7660 K.)
Guilt of Causing Death by Taxpayer
SUMMARY: Supports this defense with the defense that the defendant stopped in the lane during the incident and did not go back. The accounts of the only eyewitness to the incident in the nature do not coincide with the information in the accident detection protocol issued by the traffic police on duty. There are also differences between the expert who determines the defendant's defect rate according to these alternatives and the report of the Forensic Medicine Agency in terms of accepting the manner of occurrence of the incident and determining the defect rates by assessing the manner of occurrence of the incident according to two separate possibilities. Therefore, it is imperative that the officers who issue the traffic accident detection protocol be listened to as witnesses, if necessary, make a reconnaissance at the scene of the incident and, after this stage, proceed to the path of determining the defendant's defect status, to arrive at the material truth.
Crime of Murder by Taxi — The need to determine the penalty binding the basic liberty by further distancing it from the lower order — the inaccuracy of the determination of the incomplete penalty — that the provision is broken...
SUMMARY: The criteria contained in Articles 61/1 and 22/4 of the TCK of the local court of resistance, which is appropriate for the conversion of the impunity imposed on the accused into a criminal fine pursuant to Article 50/1-a of the TCK, which requires a sentence of 2 to 6 years imprisonment, binding the basic liberty of the defendant Whereas it must be determined by further distancing from the lower order in accordance with it, it must be decided that the incomplete penalty should be distorted due to its inaccuracy.
TaksirleCrime of Causing Death — where the lack of a driver's license of the defendant is justified by the local court that the act was carried out by conscious appraisal — does not alone indicate that the act was carried out by conscious appraisal...
SUMMARY: Although the local court has shown that the defendant's lack of a driver's license has been justified that the act was carried out by conscious taxi, driving without a driver's license does not alone indicate that the act was carried out by conscious taxi, and it is known that driving without a driver's license is also known by the Private Office, which conducts an appeal examination of the sentences for crimes of manslaughter and wounding by taxi. not considered a taxi cab. (5237 S. K. m. 22) (2918 S. K. m. 52) (Highways Traffic Ordinance. 138) Accused of causing death by taxi ( H.Y.) on the punishment of H.Y.) with a prison sentence of 2 years and 8 months in accordance with articles 85/1 and 22/3 of TCK No. 5237 pursuant to Articles 85/1 and 22/3 of TCK No. 5237, the 12th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, which examined the file on the appeal of the sentence No. 613-716 on 23 June 2010 by the 12th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of First Instance on the appeal by the defense of the defendant on 23 June 2010. day and number 21409 — 13906; it was decided that it was corrupted due to inaccuracy.
Elements of the assessment in many decisions of the Criminal General Assembly, as adopted in the teaching;
1- The fact that the act is a crime that can be committed by installment,
2-The will of the movement,
3-The undesirability of the result,
4- Finding a causal link between motion and outcome,
5- The fact that the result is foreseeable, it is considered that it is unpredictable.
In the case of metered crimes, both the enforcement action and the negligent act must be willful and the outcome that occurs must be predictable. In the absence of intentional conduct, there can be no mention of the appraiser, and in the event of an unpredictable outcome, the perpetrator cannot be held responsible for the assessed crime. In the realization of the result, if the victim's assessed behavior is also found to have an effect, this does not change the nature of the assessment, as long as the other assessed behavior does not cut the causal link, as this does not eliminate the victim's assessed responsibility. Since there is no penalty reduction by rating the defect in TCK No. 5237, this the situation can only be taken into account in the determination of the basic penalty. In TCK No. 5237, the appraiser is distinguished in the form of simple assessment and conscious assessment, conscious assessment in paragraph 22/3 of the law; defined, in which case it is envisaged that the penalty for the assessed crime will be increased from one-third to one-half. The distinguishing criterion between simple taxidermy and conscious taxidermy is that in taxidermy the perpetrator does not foresee a predictable outcome, whereas in the case of conscious taxidermy he predicts this outcome.
The result that occurs in conscious appraisal is undesirable, although it is predicted by the perpetrator. While he really predicts the outcome, the state of anyone who acts by relying solely on luck or other factors, or even on his own skill or knowledge, cannot be reconciled with that of anyone who did not foresee it. Whoever foresees the outcome, whatever happens, is obliged not to act to bring about that outcome.
In the light of these statements, the case, which developed in the event that the defendant struck (E.), who was walking on the side of the road without adjusting the speed according to the road conditions, causing his death from behind and causing his death on a slightly sloping and curved road, there was no evidence that he was driving excessively fast and dangerously, and that he did not know how to drive, nor did he know how to drive. It is necessary to accept that the non-accused, although he must foresee the outcome that occurs, he cannot foresee it by not paying the necessary attention and care, therefore, that there is no state of conscious appraisal. Although the local court has shown that the defendant's lack of a driver's license has been justified that the act was carried out by conscious taxi, driving without a driver's license does not alone indicate that the act was carried out by conscious taxi, and it is known that driving without a driver's license is also known by the Private Office, which conducts an appeal review of sentences for crimes of manslaughter and wounding by taxi. it is not recognized as a state of taxidermy. (Decisions of 12 C.D. No. 1592-19861 of 12.09.2013 and No. 2681-22998 of 08.10.2013). In this regard, it must be decided that the local court order to resist, which is incorrect, should be overturned. For the reasons described, (A.) The decision of the 10th Criminal Court of Appeal on 03.10.2012 and 593 — 644 was impaired by the acceptance that he carried out the act by conscious reckoning, without regard to the fact that the defendant performed his act with a conscious assessment, without regard to the fact that the defendant had performed his act with an estimate.