Gliwice. Nine people died. The prosecutor's office wants four years in prison for the driver

On Thursday, the District Court in Gliwice heard the closing arguments in the trial that lasted over two years. The verdict will be announced on December 12.

The accident occurred on August 22, 2020 in the evening on national road No. 88 near the Kleszczów junction (Śląskie). According to the prosecutor's office, Jerzy S., the Volkswagen driver accused in this case, allegedly started overtaking the bus in front of him. He didn't notice the Renault Trac coming from the opposite direction. The driver of the passenger car and the bus took defensive maneuvers. The Trafic drove to the side of the road, overturned and then started sliding along the road. This car was hit by a bus traveling from the opposite direction. The force of the impact was so great that the bus was completely crushed. All people driving the truck died. Seven people from the bus were injured – the driver and six passengers.

Jerzy S. was charged with unintentionally causing a catastrophe that threatened the health and lives of many people, resulting in the death of nine people, and causing bodily injury to another seven. The defense believes that he did not contribute to this tragedy.

As prosecutor Maria Mizera said in her speech on Thursday, the trial confirmed that the disaster was caused by an incorrect overtaking maneuver. Citing expert opinions and witness statements, she questioned the defense line that the accident was the result of a tire exploding in the defendant's car and then hitting an unidentified object.

The prosecutor demands four years in prison for S., a driving ban for 15 years, and an obligation to pay compensation – PLN 30,000 each. PLN for the victims' relatives, PLN 20,000 each for people who were injured in an accident for more than seven days, PLN 15,000 each. PLN for those whose injuries lasted less than a week and PLN 10,000 each. PLN for other participants in the accident.

Proc. Mizera emphasized that the accused had committed an act of very high social harmfulness and only a sentence of absolute imprisonment was adequate in this case. “Fatal accidents have been a plague in recent years. People overestimate their skills and capabilities, and it only takes a moment for a tragedy to occur,” the prosecutor concluded.

Her conclusions were supported by the representatives of the subsidiary prosecutors, who said that Jerzy S. tried to overtake despite the ban – a double solid line and in difficult conditions – at night, in the rain. They accused the accused of being reckless, which led to the tragedy, and of showing no remorse during the trial. They added that the verdict in this case should be a warning to all road users. There are several dozen victims in the trial.

In his speech, the defendant's defense attorney, Henryk Skudrzyk, argued that despite the opinions of experts and the testimonies of witnesses, there were many doubts in the case which, in accordance with the principles of criminal law, should be resolved in favor of Jerzy S. For this reason, he requested acquittal, pointing to the “lack of sufficient evidence of guilt.

As the lawyer said, the main doubt is whether the accused was in the opposite lane of his own will. According to the defense, no, because it was the result of the tire blowing out and the wheels locking, which resulted in two vehicles rubbing against each other. According to attorney Skudrzyk, the opinions and testimonies of witnesses are not clear, and the testimony of at least two of them can be considered as confirmation of the defense version. The lawyer also pointed out that the bus with which the bus collided was traveling at excessive speed (81 km/h with a speed limit of 70 km/h) and, according to experts, if it had been moving in accordance with the regulations, it would have stopped 3 m earlier.

The indictment was brought to court in April 2022. The Gliwice-Zachód District Prosecutor's Office reported that the suspect, a 69-year-old resident of Cieszyn at the time, did not admit to unintentionally causing the disaster during the investigation.

After presenting the charge, investigators sent a request to arrest the driver, justifying it with the severe penalty he faced and the need to ensure the proper course of proceedings. Both the first and second instance courts did not agree to this.