Constitutional Court rejects complaint from man convicted of death of four-year-old child in Most
Michal Pokuta will serve 17 years in prison for the murder of a four-year-old boy in Most. The Constitutional Court rejected his complaint as manifestly unfounded.
Constitutional Court upholds 17-year sentence for child's death in Most car park
The Constitutional Court rejected a complaint from Michal Pokuta, meaning he will now definitively serve a seventeen-year sentence for the death of a four-year-old boy in Most. According to Aktuálně.cz, the court concluded that the complaint was manifestly unfounded.
The attack took place on 27 May 2023 in a car park in Most. The boy's Italian father had travelled to the city to meet his son's mother, who had recently ended their relationship. When he noticed Pokuta nearby, he ran after him, hurled insults at him and threatened him with a wooden lath. Pokuta initially left the scene, but then returned and attacked the Italian man with a knife.
With a single blow he only slightly scratched the man's hand. The child, whom the father was holding in his arms, was struck in the carotid artery and vein. The boy did not survive the attack. The conflict took place in front of several witnesses, including minors.
Murder, not negligence
The state prosecution initially charged the act as death through negligence, but the courts reclassified it as murder. Pokuta was also found guilty of attempting to cause grievous bodily harm to the Italian man and disorderly conduct. He faced a sentence of 15 to 20 years' imprisonment.
At the time of the offence, Pokuta was on probation for another criminal offence and was under the influence of cannabis and amphetamine. According to court-appointed experts, however, the drugs did not substantially impair his cognitive or volitional abilities. The judiciary concluded that whilst he did not primarily intend the child's death, he must have been aware that he could kill the child in the course of the attack.
Change of legal classification upheld
In his constitutional complaint, Pokuta argued that the change in legal classification from negligence to murder violated his fundamental rights. He emphasised that the intended target of the attack was the father, not the child, and that he wanted to protect the other people present. He also pointed to the influence of narcotic substances, which he claimed reduced his ability to foresee the fatal outcome.
The Constitutional Court judges rejected this argument. "A change in legal assessment is permissible, but it must be properly reasoned, which has been the case here. The reasoning of the challenged decisions is sufficiently logical and comprehensible," they stated in their ruling. "The fact that the complainant takes a different legal view from the ordinary courts does not mean that the reasoning of their decisions is not convincing," the Constitutional Court decided.
The judgment is now final and Pokuta will serve his sentence in full.
Source: Aktuálně.cz