A, B, C and D
The Commissioner for Eastern Jutland,
the Public Prosecutor and
the Ministry of Justice
Judgment in a case concerning, among other things, the death of two people during an arrest for TWOC. The Danish press has referred to the incident as the "Tilst case".
On the night before 29 December 2001, the Aarhus Police responded to a report concerning three unregistered – probably TWOC – four-wheel-drive vehicles driving "like mad" in the direction from Aarhus towards Tilst. When patrolling the estate Anelystparken, a patrol car had observed some people dressed in white boiler suits with hoods over their heads standing next to three four-wheel-drive vehicles. One of the cars – a grey Jeep – immediately sped away, forcing a patrol car to make an emergency manoeuvre, while the two other cars – a green Jeep and a Mercedes – shortly afterwards ran into the patrol car. In connection with the collision, police officer G shot at the green Jeep and at the Mercedes. The driver of the Jeep, E, received a fatal shot to the head. One of the other shots hit the driver of the Mercedes, F, next to his eyelid, causing no harm. Immediately after this, police offer G saw a person in the Mercedes reach for an object which he perceived to be a sawn-off shotgun. Afraid to get shot, he fired a shot through the front side window on the right-hand side of the Mercedes. This shot hit the driver of the Mercedes in the back, killing him. Shortly after, police officer H knocked on the front side window on the right-hand side of the green Jeep with his pistol, which caused one shot to go off, breaking the window. All of this lasted no more than 1½ minutes.
The appellants, E's father, F's mother and two of the passengers in the four-wheel-drive vehicles, claimed, among other things, compensation from the Commissioner for Eastern Jutland, the Public Prosecutor and the Ministry of Justice for non-pecuniary loss due to infringement of Articles 2 and 3 of the European Human Rights Convention. The Commissioner for Eastern Jutland, the Public Prosecutor and the Ministry of Justice moved for rejection of the claim.
The Supreme Court stated that neither the shots killing the drivers of the green Jeep and the Mercedes, the shot through the side window on the right-hand side of the Jeep, nor the investigation carried out under Section 1020a of the Danish Administration of Justice Act had involved infringements of the European Human Rights Convention. Consequently, there was no basis for awarding the appellants compensation.
The High Court had reached the same conclusion.