Court acquits rent collector of embezzling ‘hefty’ cash
KUWAIT CITY, July 15: The Court of First Instance acquitted a rent collector and rejected the civil case filed against him for alleged betrayal of trust and use of rents worth a total of KD 45,000 for personal use. Lawyer Khawlah Mubarak Al-Hassawi, who represented the defendant, explained that the Public Prosecution charged the suspect of collecting the money belonging to the landlord and using it for personal use. He had collected the amount from caretakers of the buildings but did not deposit it in the bank account of the owner, due to which he was relieved of his job. However, Lawyer Al-Hassawi countered the allegation, saying the case against her client was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Man absolved: The Criminal Court acquitted a citizen of possessing hashish. Case files indicate a friend of the accused borrowed his car and the friend passed by a security checkpoint but he did not stop. Securitymen then forced him to stop, resulting in the discovery of an undisclosed quantity of hashish. He was referred to the concerned security unit where he denied having any link with the hashish and the car. The officers summoned the owner of the car for questioning, during which he denied the accusation saying he handed over his car to the friend’s uncle. The Public Prosecution charged the owner of the car with possessing drugs. Attorney Zaid Al-Khabbaz, who represented the accused in court, demanded for acquittal of his client as he was not caught red-handed. He also pointed out that the investigation results are not enough to prove his client is guilty, adding the testimonies of the two security officers were false. He said his client has no criminal record and he has never been accused of possessing drugs.
Verdict nullified: The Court of Cassation nullified the verdict issued by the Court of Appeals, which indicted a Kuwaiti female consultant surgeon for allegedly forgetting a piece of gauze inside the stomach of a patient after a surgical operation. The court acquitted the surgeon. According to the appeal filed by defense counsel to the doctor Lawyer Hawra Al-Habib, the patient filed a case against her client who works in a local hospital, claiming to be suffering from acute pain after the surgery. It was later discovered that the pain was due to a piece of gauze left in her stomach after the surgery. She demanded penalty to be issued against the doctor. The lower court refrained from pronouncing penalty, but ordered the doctor to pay KD 1,000 worth bail bond and sign an undertaking of good moral conduct for six months. Lawyer Al-Habib disagreed with the previous court ruling, saying her client was not responsible for the damages emanating from the intervention. She declared that a doctor can not determine the effect of operation, healing or its success, stressing that the doctor is only obliged to exert efforts carefully, while the patient should complement the efforts in such unusual situations.
By Jaber Al-Hamoud Al-Seyassah Staff
Do the second and third cases seem like offenses that should earn “hard time” to you? And should the second cases even be prosecuted when authorities have no evidence that determines who was guilty “beond a reasonable doubt” ? It should never be essy to take person’s freedom or livlihood.
ReplyDelete