The Analysis Of The Yue Baohua Case Of Traffic Hit-and-run

Yuebaohua case is a typical road-traffic-safety accident in which the suspect violated the law. How to determine the nature of the case, how to use the indirect evidences, and how much obligation the parties should take are the keys to solve the case. What is the nature of the case, i.e., traffic liability accident, traffic accident or hit-and-run case is the most important key to correctly handle the case. The statement of the suspect Yuebaohua is the only direct evidence of the case. Because the witnesses of the case are all indirect witnessed witnesses, the testimonies of them are all indirect evidences. Other indirect evidences include three inspection reports and three appraisal instruments. As to the problem of determining the evidential qualification of the investigation department’s investigation experimental results, there are two totally different views, i.e., the view taking the results as indirect evidences and the view excluding the results from the evidences of the case. As to the comprehensive probative force of the evidences of the case, there are also two difference views. One thinks that the direct evidence and the indirect evidences confirm with each other, the other thinks that the comprehensive probative force of the direct evidence and the indirect evidences is not strong enough. Yuebaohua’s liability has caused big controversy among relevant departments, the parties and the close relatives of the parties. There are four perspectives for Yuebaohua’s liability, i.e., primary responsibility, full responsibility, bearing no more than10%of the liability for compensation and no responsibility. According to the transport laws of our country, to determine the party’s act as hit-and-run, the party’s subjective fault must be intentional and the party must objectively flee the scene in order to avoid the duty of assistance and legal obligation. Yuebaohua had escaped the scene under the knowledge of the occurrence of the accident, and assumed that he had not seen the object being hit and he had mistaken the object as the obstruction set up by robberies. Besides, he had not reported the accident to the police. Therefore, his behavior should be identified as hit-and-run. As the investigation experimental results have all the evidential characteristics, they can be directly used as indirect evidences. The direct evidence and indirect evidences of Yuebaohua case can exclusively prove the suspect Yuebaohua’s behavior as traffic accident crime, and can determine Bianxiaoxiao’s fault and fault degree for the case. The conclusion is that Yuebaohua bears primary responsibility and Bianxiaoxiao bears secondary responsibility.