Supreme Court: It Is Allowed to Lean Into Another Person’s Car and Turn Off the Ignition

Supreme Court It Is Allowed to Lean Into a Car and Turn Off the IgnitionIn March 2013, a 68 year old man was on his way to a doctor’s appointment in Oslo when an acute situation between him and a woman in her 20s occurred. The man, who is asthmatic, pulled up her car door and leaned over her while he stopped the engine.

Why? The car was idling.

Argument Arose

The man and his family are asthmatic and have allergies, and according to his explanation he is particularly concerned about unnecessarily pollution from cars.

He therefore went over to the passenger side of the small Toyota where the woman sat and got her to open the car door. She did not turn off the ignition as he asked, and an argument arose before she closed the door.

According to the County Court from September 2013, the man then opened the car door and “leaned over the aggrieved as he tried to turn the ignition key. After a few tries he managed to turn it off and then he pulled out of the car and left the place.”

The woman testified that she was a little scared and tried to get the man out of the car without success.

Supreme Court: Legal

The man did not accept any of the fines he received from the police, the County Court and later the High Court.

Now, the Supreme Court has reached a verdict in favor of the 68 years old.

“The reason was honorable; He wanted to get her to stop idling (…) that he, as an asthmatic, is particularly concern about”, Supreme Court writes in their decision.

The Supreme Court also think there was nothing wrong with the man’s behavior, “but that she immediately reacted with rejection and profanities. The further course of events was thus not unprovoked, and the violation was modest.”

A total Supreme Court therefore concludes that to open another person’s car door, lean over the passenger and after a few tries turning the ignition key to stop the engine, cannot be characterized as “reckless behavior” and thus not punishable.

The man was acquitted and did not have to pay the costs he was previously sentenced.

 

Text modified by: Anette Broteng Christiansen, ThorNews

Source: Aftenposten

Photo: Domstol

Advertisements


Categories: Quirky

1 reply

  1. I think the man had a right to walk away and a right to stop being defective/asthmatic. A man who reached into my car would be met with violence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: