The Dubai Criminal Court ruled to imprison four Asians for three years, and fined them jointly 500,000 dirhams, the value of stolen items that included jewelry, gold bullion, and precious watches that they seized from the villa of a Gulf person while he was travelling.
The police arrested one of the defendants immediately after committing the crime, and later arrested two others even though they fled outside the country. The three defendants appealed the initial ruling before the Courts of Appeal and Cassation, but the ruling was finally upheld.
In detail, the facts of the case, according to what was established in the court’s confidence and reassured its conscience, stated that the four defendants agreed among themselves to steal houses and villas under the cover of night, and they rented a car in the name of a person of the same nationality who was not aware of the incident, and the first defendant drove the car and watched the villa.
The lawsuit papers stated that the defendants became certain of the absence of the villa’s residents for a long period, by monitoring it at different times of the day, so they divided the roles among themselves, as one of them cut off the power supply with the intention of disconnecting the cameras, then another took over the monitoring process, while two others surrounded it, entered, and then They broke an iron safe and found inside it a large number of gold sets, bullion, and precious watches, and fled the place.
The lawsuit papers indicated that three of the defendants fled directly outside the country before the incident was discovered, leaving the first defendant with a promise to give him his share of the stolen proceeds at a later time, but he was arrested and confessed in detail in the police report that he had committed the incident, and he directed the detectives to the villa where They stole it.
The victim stated in the Public Prosecution’s investigations that he left with his family to spend a vacation abroad, and he tightly closed all the doors of the house, and made sure that the surveillance cameras were running. On the day of their return, the domestic helper went to the villa to prepare it, but she and the driver were surprised by the power being cut off, and it became clear that the house had been broken into. And he was robbed.
A police witness stated that he interrogated the first accused, who admitted that he was with the fleeing accused during the crime, and that they fled with the stolen items, and did not give him his share according to the agreement. He showed the accused pictures of watches and other items that were supposed to be his share.
For its part, the court explained in the merits of its ruling that it was established that the four defendants committed the crime, and that the first defendant confessed in detail in the police evidence report. The court was reassured by his confession because it was issued out of a conscious will, and this was reinforced by his directing the police officers to the location of the villa, which would support the rest of the evidence. The evidence convicting the defendants, and then it ruled in the presence of the first defendant, and in absentia, that the other three defendants be imprisoned for three years, fined them jointly in the amount of 500 thousand dirhams, deported them from the state, and referred the case to the competent civil court.
In addition, the police were able to arrest two other defendants at a later time, and they submitted a request to the Criminal Court to repeat the trial procedures, given that a ruling was issued against them in absentia, and the court ruled in their presence to uphold the ruling issued against them along with the other defendants.
The three arrested defendants were not satisfied with the initial ruling, so they appealed it before the Court of Appeal and denied the charges against them, while the Public Prosecution requested confirmation of the ruling.
After examining the appeals by the Court of Appeal, it concluded that the initial ruling correctly concluded that the defendants were convicted, as the evidence supported the validity and integrity of attributing the incident to them. Therefore, it ignores their denial and does not rely on it, and sees it as merely a means of denying the accusation, and it ruled to uphold the ruling by imprisoning them and fining them. They were deported, and the Court of Cassation in turn upheld the ruling.
#Asians #steal #jewelry #watches #worth #thousand #dirhams #villa