The driver Vladimir Belsky was found guilty of hooliganism involving weapons-like objects and assaulting a child. He received a sentence of probation for a year and a half, and in a civil lawsuit brought by the child’s family he was ordered to pay 1.5 million rubles in damages.
The events occurred in Priozersk, where two children were playing near the roadside, shooting toy balls from a small machine at passing cars. Belsky drove up, struck one child, and forced him to kneel, while the second child managed to flee. The driver kept the injured child in that kneeling position until police arrived. He later claimed that he believed the police he called would punish the child and his parents. He admitted guilt only after the investigation concluded and proposed the account that the child knelt and pleaded with him not to call the police.
When the case became public and drew widespread attention, it came under the scrutiny of Alexander Bastrykin, the head of Russia’s Commission of Inquiry. Bastrykin and his colleagues ordered Belsky’s detention and brought formal charges against him.
At trial, prosecutors argued that the children’s actions did not present a danger to Belsky or his vehicle. They emphasized that Belsky’s aggressive conduct created real danger and appeared aimed at asserting his dominance. The regional inquiry commission noted that only by a stroke of luck did the SUV maneuver and the attempted harm to a child not escalate into more severe consequences. They pointed out that after forcing the child to kneel and beating him, Belsky refused to summon an ambulance, a decision the Public Prosecution Service described as clear evidence of guilt.
Despite this, some observers and commentators believed the sentence did not match the severity of the crime. In response, the Public Prosecution Service declined to appeal or seek a harsher punishment for the driver.
In related developments, recent court activity included a ruling in a high-profile case involving a noticed drinking incident labeled as the “drunk boy.” Another notable case involved municipal traffic police officers from the capital who were sentenced to 4.5 years in prison for assaulting a driver. These cases have amplified public discussion about accountability for violence connected to law enforcement or private individuals in positions of authority.
Media coverage and public reaction to the Belsky case reflect ongoing concerns about road safety, the safety of minors, and the appropriate boundaries of reaction when confronting perceived misconduct. Legal authorities have stressed the importance of proportional responses, adherence to due process, and the protection of vulnerable individuals in all circumstances involving traffic incidents and street-level aggression.