Facts
The appellant [X.] was found guilty of negligent bodily harm (Art. 125 para. 1 SCC) by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich. On July 12, 2016, he had turned his taxi on the height of Limmatquai 112 over the tram tracks and cut off the right of way of the oncoming tram of line 15. The tram driver had to initiate a full brake to avoid a collision, as a result of which a tram passenger fell and was injured.
The District Court of Zurich had originally acquitted the appellant of guilt and penalty. However, on appeal by the public prosecutor's office, the High Court overturned this judgment and sentenced the appellant to a conditional fine and a fine.
The appellant lodged a criminal complaint and requested that the judgment of the High Court be overturned and that he be acquitted. He argued that the lower court had established the facts regarding the alleged near-collision and the identity of the allegedly culpable taxi driver solely on the basis of the statements of the tram driver [A.] , although the latter should have been questioned as a person providing information.
Considerations
The Federal Court dismissed the appeal. It stated that the lower court had established the facts in a legally sufficient manner on the basis of the convincing and detailed statements of the tram driver [A.] . The fact that [A.] had been questioned as a witness rather than as a person providing information did not render his statements inadmissible.
The Federal Court also found that the appellant was not affected in his own rights by the faulty legal and duty instruction of [A.] . The public prosecutor's interrogation of the tram driver [A.] was admissible as evidence and was subject to the judge's obligatory evaluation of evidence.
The Federal Court also examined the complaint of arbitrariness and found that the lower court's evaluation of the available evidence and its reliance on the descriptions of the tram driver did not reveal…