Emergencies | Professor of criminal law on the Terveystalo case: “Common sense would say that the attacker is borrowed”

The Terveystalo case seems complicated from the point of view of criminal law, says the professor of criminal law at the University of Helsinki Kimmo Nuotio.

He commented on the incident based on media information.

It is about the resuscitation situation that happened at the Turku bus station on Monday. Turku Sanomat according to the information, a bystander went to ask for a pacemaker loan from the Terveystalo office across the road. However, Iskur was not loaned.

The police have started a preliminary investigation into the case. The matter is being investigated by the police as negligence of a rescue operation.

Neglecting rescue measures is regulated in the Criminal Code. Fines or up to six months in prison can be imposed.

A campfire in my opinion, the Terveystalo case seems to be one that cannot be easily evaluated in terms of the threat of punishment.

According to Nuotion, only people, not companies, can be punished for neglecting a rescue operation.

“In a way, one would assume that common sense would say to borrow a striker and let’s go and use it ourselves,” says Nuotio.

He points out that general civic duty concerns taking rescue measures. According to him, criminality is not related to, for example, how the person who needed help turns out in the end.

“In this case, it could be said that rescue measures had been taken at the point when the emergency center was called and help was coming. I can’t directly say that the threat of punishment is suitable for such situations, [kuten Terveystalon tapaus]”, Nuotio commented based on media reports.

However, according to Nuoto, the punishment could be justified, for example, by the fact that the striker existed and could have been used.

Rescue operation In Nuotion’s opinion, the clause regarding negligence is written into the law quite cleverly.

“For example, you don’t have to save anyone at the risk of your own life, but you have to take reasonable rescue measures.”

According to Nuoto, calling the emergency number 112 is often sufficient for this.

According to Nuotion, negligence of rescue action is mainly committed when you do nothing to help someone in distress.

“The only thing you shouldn’t do is to stand your ground and not inform anyone, even if you understand the danger of the situation.”

HS asked From the campfire, examples of how bystanders should act in certain emergency situations based on the law. Different moral questions are a separate issue.

Does a bystander have to stop to help at the scene of a traffic accident if it means, for example, being late for work or a doctor’s appointment, which can lead to problems and financial penalties?

“If you notice an accident first, you must call the emergency number. However, the obligation to help bystanders does not go very far under the law. There is no need to stop at the scene of the accident if there are already other people there.”

The situation is different if you yourself are involved in a traffic accident.

“In this case, it is about the traffic escape regulation, according to which you may not leave the place.”

If you see a person lying on the ground on the street, do you have to go check on them or can you just walk by, for example, because you fear that the other person is intoxicated or aggressive?

“Even in this situation, you have to call 112. However, it would be good to check the person’s condition before calling. It’s worth taking a friend with you.”

If someone calls for help in the water at the beach, how should those on the beach act? Is it enough to simply call for help, or do you have to go to rescue a person from the water yourself?

“You can fulfill your general civic duty by calling the emergency number. That’s the minimum here. However, it should be seen whether other rescue measures can be taken. There are often lifebuoys and lifeboats on the beaches.”