Burglary suspect drowns while being chased by community security

The family's claim of 1.58 million yuan was dismissed by the court, and the security guard's chasing behavior had no causal relationship with his death

　　One day in September 2020, a property staff member of a community in Kunshan, Suzhou received a call from the owner for help, saying that a thief might be trying to break into the house.

Later, several property security guards found Qin who was suspicious in the community. During the pursuit, Qin unfortunately drowned.

Qin's family sued the property company to the Kunshan City People's Court, demanding compensation of more than 1.58 million yuan in compensation for death and mental damage.

Is Qin Mou a thief?

Is the property company liable for his death?

Recently, the reporter learned from the Kunshan Court the detailed facts and verdict of the case.

　　Yangzi Evening News/Ziniu News reporter Wan Chengyuan

process

The security guard asked the owner for help to chase the theft suspect, who jumped into the river

　　On the afternoon of the day of the incident, Chen Mou, the female owner of a community in Kunshan, was at home when she suddenly heard the sound of someone opening and locking the door.

Chen was very puzzled. Looking out from the cat's eye, he happened to see a strange man also looking in from the cat's eye.

In a panic, Chen used the key to insert the key into the keyhole to prevent the man from opening the door from the outside.

　　The strange man tried to open the door without success, so he left.

Suspecting that the other party was a thief, Chen immediately called her husband and asked him to notify the community property company to investigate and verify.

The two security guards of the property company went to check after receiving the call, and they saw a man who matched the description on the phone as soon as they left the bathroom.

At that time, the man was running from the 7th building of the community to the 12th building, but when the security guard caught up with the 12th building, the man had disappeared.

　　It turned out that the man Qin was chased by the security guard and jumped into the river next to him.

The security guard called him "come up quickly" many times on the shore, but Qin climbed up a plank road not far from the shore.

Submerged in river and drowned, police found suspicious property on him

　　At this time, a person walked by on the plank road. The security guard pointed at Qin and said to passersby, "That's a thief, catch him!" Qin heard and jumped into the water on the other side of the plank. The water on this side was relatively open, and he was in After struggling a few times in the water, he sank into the water.

　　Ding Mouqiang, the property manager, found that Qin Mou slapped the water with his hands randomly and sank, and immediately jumped into the river, but soon felt exhausted.

At this time, a boat for salvaging aquatic plants passed by, and the people on the boat also participated in the rescue, but Qin was not found.

　　110 and 120 arrived quickly, and Qin had no vital signs when he was rescued from the water.

After the incident, multiple owners who witnessed the incident confirmed that they did not see the property staff violently beat the chased person.

The police found more than a dozen plastic packaging bags on the body of the drowned man, including pearl earrings, rings, necklaces and other items, as well as some cash.

At 6 p.m. that night, another owner of the community called the police, saying that 10,000 yuan in cash and a shopping card worth 2,500 yuan were lost at home.

The suspect's family claimed 1.58 million yuan, and the property owner thought it should not be held responsible

　　After the incident, Qin's family sued the community property company to the Kunshan court, demanding compensation for death compensation and mental damage consolation totaling 1.58 million yuan.

Qin's family believed that Qin was walking normally in the community, and there was no evidence that he had theft or other illegal acts.

The family members said that the property staff had "chased after" before, and then "didn't help after seeing death", which caused the serious consequences of Qin's death, and should bear full responsibility for this.

　　The property company stated that Qin should take the risk by himself when he jumped into the river without any threat to his personal safety in order to avoid legal responsibility after the theft was discovered that day.

The chasing behavior of the staff is to perform the responsibility of community management, and has the nature of righteousness and courage. After discovering that the other party jumped into the river, he jumped into the river to rescue, and there was no inappropriateness in the process.

Therefore, the property company believes that Qin's death has no legal causal relationship with the behavior of the property staff, and should not bear any responsibility.

Court decision

There is no fault in the property, and all the petitions of the family are dismissed

　　The court held that Qin's physical features were similar to the man Chen's described who tried to open his house, and Qin ran away immediately after being discovered by security guards without clarification.

The property security's pursuit of Qin should be a normal performance of duty.

During the chase, there was no evidence that the security guards were armed and committed violence during the chase.

Qin came to the river before the chasers and jumped into Hanoi on his own initiative. There was no situation where the defendant staff violently forced him to jump into Hanoi, and the defendant staff Ding Qiang jumped into Hanoi to rescue him.

　　In addition, the court found that some items were extracted from the scene of the incident by the public security organ, combined with Qin's previous theft record and the owner's report of theft in the community, he was suspected of major theft of property.

Qin was sentenced to three years and two months in prison and a fine in March 2017 by the people's court of a district in Shanghai for theft.

　　In the end, the court found that the defendant's staff did not act at fault in the process of chasing Qin, and there was no legal causal relationship between his pursuit and Qin's death, and therefore dismissed all the claims of Qin's family.