Channels

Maxim Baskin

Family of soldier killed in car accident while under influence compensated

The Defense Ministry reaches settlement with family of Maxim Baskin, who was killed in 2008 in a road accident while driving a military vehicle, despite the fact that alcohol was detected in his blood; NIS 1.1 million to be given to family on condition family forfeit demand that it be recognized a family of a fallen soldier.

An unusual settlement has been reached between the Defense Ministry and the family of an IDF soldier who was killed in a road accident in 2008, with the family relinquishing its demand to be recognized as a fallen soldier's bereaved family in favor of NIS 1.1 million in compensation. 

 

  

According to the IDF, the soldier, Maxim Baskin from Ashdod, had not followed protocol when he left the Infantry School military base in the Negev, where he was serving, after having consumed alcohol.

 

Upholding the agreement, Judge Sara Dovrat converted it into a court order. Her decision emphasized that "the deceased's driving under the influence of alcohol consisted of poor judgment and reckless behavior, which should deny recognition according to section 16 of the law regarding families of soldiers who lost their lives in the line of duty."

 

Maxim Baskin (Photo: Memorial Site)
Maxim Baskin (Photo: Memorial Site)

 

It should be noted that had the Defense Ministry's appeal been rejected, and had the Baskins been fully recognized as a bereaved family of a fallen soldier, his parents would have been compensated with a monthly allowance of thousands of shekels for the rest of their lives, as well as further benefits.

 

During the long legal battle between the two sides, the family claimed that the Defense Ministry should recognize Maxim as a soldier killed in the line of duty since he was under orders when he drove off base in the military vehicle.

 

The family's demand was immediately rejected, however, due to the fact that a moderate level of alcohol was detected in Baskin's blood following the accident.

 

Nevertheless, the family filed a subsequent appeal at the Be'er Sheva Magistrate's Court, who in turn, accepted their request.

 

In turn, the Defense Ministry appealed the decision to the Be'er Sheva District Court. Following the conclusion of the protracted deliberations, the court decided to compensate the family with a one-time stipend of over NIS 1 million.

 

The transfer of the sum was conditional upon the decision falling under the Road Accident Victims Compensation Law.

 

The Baskins claimed throughout their legal battle that the on duty officer on base approved Maxim's departure with the military vehicle, but that he did so without a briefing, without the appointment of a drive commander, and without the officer signing off on the work card of determining the route—as required in standard procedure.

 

Therefore, according to the family, the circumstantial failures leading to Maxim's death fell squarely on the military, and that their son was driving under the influence was entirely unfounded.

 

For its part, the Defense Ministry claimed that the Military Police investigation revealed that Maxim had left the base unauthorized, that he had been driving under the influence, had taken the military vehicle against official orders, and had not been wearing a seatbelt.

 

The fatal crash happened near the Negev Junction on Route 40 during the weekend, when Maxim was serving as the base's on-call driver.

 

The Police Investigations Unit claimed, among other things, that the soldier left the base after an argument with female soldiers who were guarding the main entrance gate at the time, and told them that he is going to buy cigarettes and put gas in the car.

 

It also emerged that Baskin returned to the base shortly after he purchased cigarettes and a bottle of vodka.

 

Close to midnight, when he asked once again to leave the base, he came across an officer who permitted him do so with the vehicle for reasons unconnected with the military: namely, to collect items from his house and buy cigarettes for his friend.

 

Despite the fact that it was found that the officer acted entirely against protocol and several orders, and that Baskin talked him into allowing him to leave, the Military Prosecutor’s Office decided not to issue an indictment against him and instead to give him a disciplinary hearing.

 

Matters were further complicated when the Magistrate's Court determined that there was insufficient evidence indicating that Baskin was indeed under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crash—despite previous conclusions— not least because his blood was checked three days after the incident.

 

Moreover, in the evidence provided by the officer, the soldier who was with him and the soldier who was with Baskin in the car at the time, all said that he neither appeared drunk or smelled of alcohol. In addition, none of the witnesses stated that Baskin had drunk alcohol on the night of the crash.

 

The panel of judges, headed by Baruch Azulay, accepted the appeal by the Baskin family based on the evidence, and also decided that the fact that an empty bottle of vodka was found in the military vehicle after the crash does not prove that Baskin drank from it, meaning that they could not therefore deduce that he had engaged in serious misconduct.

 

The Defense Ministry responded that the transfer of compensation to the family is not intended to set a precedent. “The petition by the soldier Maxim Baskin was rejected on the grounds that … his death was caused in a road accident, in a military vehicle that left the base without permission, while drinking alcohol. The compensation officer determined that the (incident) happened because of serious misconduct on the soldier’s part,” the ministry said.

 

“The Appeals Committee accepted the appeal of the family, leading the Defense Ministry to appeal that decision at the district court. At the same time, the family's claim for compensation was examined by the Compensation Ordinance for victims of road accidents, when the Defense Ministry is the one being sued as it owns the vehicle. Since it was found that there are no grounds in the law to dismiss this claim, an agreement was reached with the family according to which the State’s appeal in the process will be accepted and the recognition of the (bereaved) family will be annulled. The family, meanwhile, will be compensated as the family of a car accident victim, in accordance with general regulations."

 


פרסום ראשון: 02.15.17, 12:33
 new comment
Warning:
This will delete your current comment