Carina apartment fire: Summoned 646 victims, only 4 people went to court, the defendant denied the motive

After more than 5 years, the Carina apartment building fire caused 13 deaths, 72 people were injured, more than 500 motorbikes and 81 cars were burned.

Accordingly, on April 5, Nguyen Van Tung (46 years old, former director of Hung Thanh Company - Carina apartment investor) and Nguyen Quoc Tuan (Head of the management board) will be tried by the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City. Crime of Violating regulations on fire prevention and fightin.g under Clause 3, Article 313 of the Penal Code, penalty frame of 7-12 years in prison.

The People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City summoned 646 victims, 70 people with related rights and obligations. However, this morning, the jury announced that only 4 victims had come to court.

At the trial, lawyer Nguyen Thanh Cong (defenders for defendant Nguyen Van Tung) asked the jury to postpone the trial to summon a number of people involved.

Lawyer Cong said that SEJCO Company, Gia Khang Company ... are also involved in the case but have not been considered by the prosecution agency for responsibility, showing signs of omission of criminals.

Accordingly, SEJCO Company is the unit that manages and operates the Carina apartment building, including the fire protection system.

"Although representatives of these two companies have testimonies, there are many contradictory statements and have not been confronted, so it is necessary to postpone the trial to summon these people," said lawyer Cong.

In response, the presiding judge said that those who were absent had already testified at the investigating agency. During the interrogation, if necessary, the trial panel would convene additionally, so the trial panel would not accept the request for adjournment of the court hearing. lawyer.

As the first person to be interrogated, defendant Nguyen Van Tung said that all the acts stated in the indictment were incorrect because the defendant did not participate in handing over the fire protection system but only received the handover from the police. previous director, continued to perform the contract between Hung Thanh Company and SEJCO Company to continue to operate the apartment building.

"The defendant has worked for Hung Thanh Company since January 15, 2017, inheriting the management from the previous director, so the inspection is from the person who went before," said Tung.

Defendant Tung said that he relied entirely on the report, but did not have expertise, expertise, and did not inspect the fire protection system. According to the contract, SEJCO Company is responsible for operating the apartment, including the fire protection system.

The chairman continued to ask: As an investor, the defendant has a statutory obligation to do these things. The defendant said he did not know the profession, so he did not check it, did not have the expertise, so why did the defendant say that he did not know the profession? incorrect status?

Responding, defendant Tung said that he had checked but had no expertise and confirmed that he had removed the pressure compensator for another unit to borrow but did not affect the fire fightin.g.

The defendant said that he discovered that SEJCO did not perform the contract correctly, so he sent many documents to ask SEJCO to perform the contract correctly.

The chairman said that the responsibility for the repair was the defendant's. "The defendant knew the fire protection status of the Carina apartment building but did not do all the responsibility," said the chairman.

"The defendant is a resident of the Carina apartment building, his wife and children are also there. The defendant always wants to give the best life to the apartment residents. Therefore, the defendant has no motive to do wrong. Because the entire damage to the apartment building is not paid by the defendant or the company, but by the residents' mone.y, the defendant has no reason not to accept the repair proposal," said Tung.

Before the trial panel, defendant Tuan said the prosecution's indictment was correct. Tuan is also aware that the responsibility of the Management Board is to check the fire protection system of the apartment.

Defendant Tuan also claimed that he knew the fire protection system was not working but had not yet proposed to the investor to repair it.

"The defendant had only returned to be the head of the Management Board for 20 days when the fire occurred. In fact, violations of the fire protection system as well as this system are not working, the investor also knows through the border. monthly inspection report, which has the signature of the representative of the investor. If properly responsible for fire prevention and fightin.g, this fire will not happen. .

According to the profile, on the evening of March 22, 2018, Mr. Dang Ngoc Lam (27 years old, from Lam Dong) rode a motorbike in the basement of the Carina apartment building. At 1:15 on March 23, 2018, a fire appeared in the area of Mr. Lam's car. At 1:18, the fire broke out fiercely.

At 1:23 a.m., the lighting system in the basement was turned off, then the fire spread to motorbikes and cars in the basement. Smoke, ho.t gases and toxic gases follow the exit stairs leading to the upper floors of the apartment. Automatic fire alarm and extinguishing system not working. The fire was getting bigger and bigger, but no security guards or anyone noticed.

In April 2018, the Criminal Science Institute of the Ministry of Public Security in Ho Chi Minh City concluded that the cause of the fire was a short circuit in the electrical conduction system of the motorcycle. From there, the fire spread in all directions and then flared up.

The investigation agency concluded that Mr. Nguyen Van Tung was informed by the apartment management board that the fire protection system was not working but did not carry out repairs and maintenance, causing serious consequences.

Mr. Nguyen Quoc Tuan informed Hung Thanh Company to repair the fire protection system, but as the head of the apartment management board, this defendant did not resolutely ask the investor to replace or repair to overcome the problem. operating system for fire alarm, fire fightin.g, rescue and rescue.

In addition, the failure to close the exit stairs caused toxic smoke to go up to the upper floors, causing many deaths and injuries, which is also the responsibility of the management.

During the investigation, defendant Tung and defendant Tuan admitted to wrongdoing. Hung Thanh Company has compensated a total of nearly 120 billion VND.

Hanoi: Apartment fire in 9-storey mini apartment, 30 people flee Quỳnh Quỳnh16:48:40 05/06/2024Spotting a burning smell with black smoke at a mini-apartment building, residents alerted local authorities. The Fire Department said it was more likely that the fire started in an old washing machine left on the balcony.