3 vehicles collided due to not leaving enough distance

The Dubai Traffic Court convicted an Asian driver, after he caused a traffic accident that damaged three vehicles, after driving without leaving a sufficient safety distance, and fined him 1,000 dirhams, suspending the implementation of the penalty for three years, after it found that the circumstances of the incident and the personality of the accused do not indicate the possibility of him returning to committing a similar violation.

The details of the case go back to when the accused was driving his vehicle on a road in the Al Barsha area, but he did not take into account the road conditions, and did not leave enough distance between him and the vehicles driving in front of him, which led to him colliding with a vehicle in front of him, before the impact of the collision spread to a third vehicle, causing material damage to the three vehicles.

The Public Prosecution referred the accused to the Traffic Court, accusing him of causing damage to property owned by others as a result of his negligent driving and failure to exercise caution, in violation of the provisions of the Traffic Law.

During the trial sessions, the accused confessed to what was attributed to him, which strengthened the technical evidence included in the case file. The court explained in the merits of its ruling that the papers included the arrest report, an inspection of the accident site, and a diagram prepared by specialists, all of which concluded that the direct cause of the accident was failure to leave a sufficient safety distance.

The court confirmed that the technical report conclusively proved the accused’s responsibility for the accident, and that the evidence was supportive, starting with the police report, passing through the inspection of the damages, and ending with the accused’s confession before the evidentiary authorities and the court, which established the court’s conviction that error on his part was proven.

The court considered, despite the conviction, that the circumstances of the incident did not reveal usual criminal behavior, and that the accused’s personality and circumstances gave rise to the belief that he would not commit a new crime again, which necessitated the use of legally prescribed clemency.