On 7 December 2018, A invited his friend B and others to their temporary residence for dinner, during which A and his wife C drank red wine together. At about 22 o'clock that night, B and others left one after another. At about 23 o'clock, when A and C were about to go upstairs to rest, C suddenly fell unconscious, foaming at the mouth. A immediately asked her daughter to call 120 for first aid**, but 120 replied that there was no emergency vehicle nearby and that it needed to be transferred from other towns and villages, and the specific arrival time could not be determined. Faced with the dying condition of his wife, A decided to drive a small car to send C to Jiangyin Qiaoqi Hospital for rescue. After arriving at the hospital, A clashed with the auxiliary police officers who had come with the police and were seized on the spot. A truthfully confessed the above facts after the incident. According to the physical evidence identification room of the Public Security Bureau, ethanol was detected in A's blood, with a content of 223mg 100ml.
The focus of the case was whether A's act of driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated in order to send his unconscious wife to medical treatment constituted emergency evasion. After trial, the court held that A's behavior was an act of emergency avoidance and should not bear criminal liability. Before the verdict was announced, the public prosecution requested the court to withdraw the indictment on the grounds of a change in law and policy, and the court finally granted the request of the people's procuratorate.
Judging from the facts of the case, A was faced with the condition that his wife's life was in danger, and he urgently called for the 120 ambulance but received a reply that he could not determine the time of arrival. In this case, A chose to drive a motor vehicle while drunk and sent his wife to the hospital privately because of the need to avoid danger in an emergency. Emergency avoidance is one of the grounds for exemption from liability as expressly provided for in the Criminal Law, and A's conduct meets a series of criteria for judging emergency avoidance.
This incident has attracted widespread attention and discussion on the Internet. Some argue that A's urgent action as a last resort to save his wife should be exempted from criminal liability; Others, on the other hand, believe that driving while intoxicated has a violation of the law and should be punished accordingly.
Similar incidents have occurred in the past. For example, if someone chooses to drive drunk to the hospital in an emergency situation where the ambulance cannot arrive in time, it is deemed that it is an emergency to avoid danger and is exempted from criminal liability. Such cases have caused widespread controversy in society, and there are different views on whether criminal liability should be exempted.
The impact of this incident on society cannot be ignored. It has triggered the public's discussion and thinking on emergency risk avoidance behavior, and conducted in-depth thinking on how to balance individual rights and interests and public interests, and how to correctly understand and apply the law. In addition, the outcome of this case also has certain guiding significance for judicial judgment in similar situations.
At the moment, there is no latest development. But this incident had a certain impact on society as a whole. People have begun to re-examine the definition and conditions of emergency avoidance, and have a deeper understanding of the grounds for exemption in criminal law. It also raises more questions, such as whether there are other ways to deal with similar situations. How to better ensure the improvement of the public emergency system? Wait a minute.
In general, A's act of driving a motor vehicle while drunk in order to send his unconscious wife to medical treatment was found to be an emergency to avoid danger and should not bear criminal liability. This incident has sparked extensive social discussion and controversy, and has certain guiding significance for how to correctly understand and apply the law. At the same time, it also brings more questions and thoughts, which require us to think deeply and **.