Shipper Lam Anh Dat, who had both arms broken – Photo: TRAN MAI
On the afternoon of April 25, the People’s Court of Quang Ngai province held a first instance trial in the case of beating a shipper and breaking his arms, which caused public outrage.
Beat the shipper to take his life even if the conflict is small
During the impeachment, the representative of the prosecutor’s office at the trial recalled the case’s developments: around 11:00 a.m. February 17, 2023, shipper Lam Anh Dat went to Mr. Truong Dinh Nhat’s house (Nghia Lam commune, Tu Nghia district, Quang Ngai). ) for delivery are two azalea plants.
Mr. Nhat did not accept the tree and was in conflict about the delivery fee. This is a petty matter, but Mr. Nhat went out to attack shipper Dat. Then Mr. Nhat and Mrs. Thuy beat each other with a stainless steel chair and an iron tube (weighing 1.8kg).
Shipper Dat’s injury assessment was 24%.
“Due to a small conflict, he used an iron pipe to hit a vital position, the head. Dat raised his hand to block it, resulting in two broken arms. Defendant Nhat hit him very hard, causing injury and was mainly responsible. Thuy used a chair to hit him, but did not cause injury. Thuy holding shipper Dat’s leg for her husband to beat is an act of helping Truong Dinh Nhat commit murder,” the representative of the prosecutor’s office stated.
During the questioning, the presiding judge asked to what extent defendant Nhat and his wife admitted to committing the crime.
Defendant Nhat said that shipper Dat insulted him. However, when the chairman asked: “What did Mr. Dat say that the defendant found offensive?”, defendant Nhat replied: “Dat spoke in a low voice, the defendant did not hear.”
The chairman immediately asked: “If you don’t hear it, saying it is insulting.” Defendant Nhat bowed his head.
Reporting the incident, defendant Nhat said it was due to a delivery fee conflict. Even though shipper Dat gave Nhat his phone to talk directly to the seller, Nhat still did not receive the goods and words were exchanged. Nhat used his foot to kick shipper Dat’s head.
When Dat reacted to fight back, Nhat punched him in the face, then pushed and forced him into the B40 mesh fence. Nhat called his wife, “Thuy, the shipper hit me.”
Defendant Thuy was bathing her child at the time. When she heard her husband shouting, she ran out but did not intervene. Instead, she immediately used a stainless steel chair to hit shipper Dat twice. Mr. Dat turned around, grabbed the chair, hit Thuy in the ribs and grabbed Thuy’s collar.
The wife did not interfere but helped her husband
At this time, Nhat stood up and used a nearby iron pipe to repeatedly hit Mr. Dat from top to bottom.
Defendant Thuy, not seeing the necklace around his neck, rushed to hug his leg and said “give me the necklace”, Mr. Dat held out his hand and said “I don’t have it”.
Mrs. Thuy held Mr. Dat’s leg with one hand, the other hand pulled the gate to prevent Mr. Dat from leaving and continued to hold Mr. Dat’s leg so that her husband could use an iron pipe to continue beating and stabbing the shipper many more times.
Mr. Dat tried to run to a nearby house to hide. When he returned to get his car, defendant Nhat continued to beat him, but luckily everyone stopped him. Mr. Dat then went to Nghia Lam Commune Police to report the incident.
Mr. Dat and his family while waiting for the trial – Photo: TRAN MAI
The court asked: “Defendant Thuy is a woman. When she saw the shipper Dat forcing her husband into the B40 net, why didn’t she stop her and instead helped and joined her husband in beating Mr. Dat?”. Defendant Thuy replied: “Because of panic.”
However, the answer was immediately questioned by the court: “At home, shipper Dat only forced her husband against the fence, absolutely did not use anything dangerous, how can you say he was panicking so he used a chair to beat him.
And why, when shipper Dat said he wouldn’t take the necklace, he still hugged her leg so her husband could beat her. As a result, I now have to share the same crime as my husband?” Defendant Thuy remained silent and could not answer.
Responding to the jury, defendant Nhat admitted that his thuggish nature and inability to control his emotions turned a very small conflict into a big incident. In 2009 and 2011, Nhat was twice in prison for property theft.
With the details of the case, the prosecutor’s office asked the court to sentence defendant Truong Dinh Nhat to 5 years to 5 years and 6 months in prison and recommended that defendant Thuy be sentenced to 2 years to 2 years and 6 months in prison, but suspended.
