Welcome to free paper download website

Criminal law

You are here: Home > Law > Criminal law > content

Glimpse of factual errors in understanding model

Author: LiLiFeng From: www.yourpaper.net Posted: 2007-11-19 13:41:48 Read:
In this paper, a set of awareness to the fact that the premise of the error problem understanding model, model construction, logical understanding of the commencement and the Principles of awareness to the fact that the more complex issues of error penal theory put forward some views of my own . In the article, the author attempts to try the method used to create awareness model, and put forward a number of their own views on factual errors, such as object errors and object distinction between legitimacy and legality of the punishment and other hot issues of error. the
Keywords: factual misperceptions model crime object protection object substances takers deliberately negates the mutable state



Preface

undeniable crime number and The "error" theoretical problems of the criminal law the commission of a crime in the two more complex areas of great research value. Through the research on the the sin number of issues own initial understanding of the the understanding model with factual errors, and the following elaborate author Yikongzhixian address this issue. in Roman period
early as there is "ignorance of the law is not amnesty," this principle to the thirteenth century, and evolved from this principle "I do not know the facts amnesty, I do not know the law of amnesty" principle. The error is divided into "factual errors" and "error of law" in this traditional criminal jurisprudence regarded criminal law. The generally considered factual error is the inconsistent behavior of people know the facts and the actual fact; legal error refers to the illegal behavior of human judgment and objective illegal inconsistent. Later, of course, led by the German Criminal proposed the so-called "constituent elements of the error" error "prohibited the sub-law, academia address this issue there is a larger debate, space is limited here only for the pass said" factual errors "awareness mode issues discussed.
according to Tong said, the so-called "de facto recognize the error" refers to the behavior of people know the facts inconsistent with the actual fact. Mainland criminal law principle in fact recognize errors usually divided into "specific factual errors" and "abstract factual errors, as well as view the division method based on the fact that awareness of error method, the object can be divided into and causation error. " 3
should be said that the pure sense of the types of little practical significance, and numerous fine division often only brought us the obstacles on the theory and practical application.
below, the author from the process of understanding their theoretical analysis of this problem, the understanding of the construction of the model, elaborate on their point of view for the fact recognize the error.



. Fact recognize misconceptions mode theory premise

should say that we carry out the process of criminal theory argument is a "justify" the process, I believe that factual errors mode should be established in the following theory premised on the , and the author later inference from these premises derived.
Of course, we must first ensure the correctness of these premises. If these preconditions are proved to be wrong, then the argument loses its meaning.
premise perpetrator intended (the intention of the perpetrator) is based on the violation of a particular object mens rea 4, for the implementation of certain harm behavior to a particular object 5. Legend can be expressed as: the crime object protected subject matter

perpetrator 6
A A
premise 2 (the perpetrator actually implemented) is actually due for reasons other than the will of the perpetrator, the perpetrator of the violations deviation in fact no actual infringement on its intention to infringe the A target of a crime, but to infringe the B crime object, and thus, in fact, against the B object of protection. 7 Legend can be expressed as: the crime object
perpetrator object of protection
the B B
premise 3 should be recognized between the the crime object and object of protection is the relationship between the phenomenon and the essence. 8 protected subject matter as a criminal law to protect abstract social relations must be by a certain specific object representation can not be divorced from the object of crime exist independently.
premise 4 crime object A the == Crime object B. We discuss the facts wrong understanding a basic theoretical premise. In other words, the actual perpetrator of harmful behavior against crime object B is certainly different from the objects of its intention to infringe crime A. A criminal object == the crime object B, then there may be nothing wrong understanding of the problem, of course, does not belong to the scope of this article to discuss.
premise that we should think the intention of the perpetrator to be engaged in behavior that can be incorporated into the criminal law within the adjustment range, which means that there is no recognize error case when the perpetrator must because it is engaged in point to the the crime object A criminal liability against the harmful behavior of the object of protection A. If the premise of a behavior is not criminal law norms, there may be nothing the facts wrong understanding problem. Whether actual infringement must constitute a crime? I believe that which belongs to the post-judgment, whether belonging to the scope of the criminal law to adjust that behavior actually practiced behavior, can not start to be judged, but should definitely purported acts are Criminal adjustment range , in the specific demonstration of error problem, i.e. afterwards judged.
premise perpetrator behavior happen "accidentally" directional change is caused due to reasons other than the will of the perpetrator. Is not a perpetrator spur of the moment, and consciously change.
premise perpetrator behavior purported to be conducted not happen, which means that there is no simultaneous presence of the the purported behavior and actual behavior. Continental criminal law scholars that this factual errors, and that this case belongs to the wrong kind of abstract facts. I can not agree with this point of view, I believe that this case should be classified as "Imagine competing category, rather than what is wrong questions.


premise 8 behavior of the actual implementation of harmful behavior and the results of the subjective attitude held by 9 how to understand it? It should be said that the "so-called factual errors negates willful" can be understood from two aspects. The one hand, due to the occurrence of errors, the behavior of people purported to be implemented, the vast majority of cases is subjective mens rea is intentional negates, that did not reach Accomplished; On the other hand, due to the occurrence of errors, the perpetrator actually occurred the dangers of the fact that it is impossible to have a good understanding of factors, that is, in the case of a wrong understanding of the facts, the perpetrator is impossible to form the actual hazards facts deliberately. Thus, the criminal law scholars generally believe that the perpetrator in this case, for actual harm fact there is negligence psychological. The 10



II. Recognizing the fact that the error model of understanding and logical reasoning process

based on the above assumption, we can propose a recognized model:


criminal target the protected object
A the A

behavior

crime the object protected subject matter
the B B
which, dashed line is the perpetrator intended to implement the behavior of the process, if not its will, other than the case, the perpetrator intended to implement the behavior is necessary according to the carry, such as the process shown by the dotted line. This is not a problem.
but due to the so-called accidentally outside the will of the perpetrator, the perpetrator's behavior happened directional change, the solid line shown in the process of behavior in fact implemented infringement different from the target of a crime A crime object B, as a result of the change this behavior directions that led us to discuss the fact understanding a number of issues on the error.
I always think so, and that all theoretical discussion in order to solve the practical problems encountered purely by the hospital on the discussion not only of no practical significance, but will give us the understanding to bring a lot of inconvenience and misunderstanding. So for the the past theorists argue in the specific instance of the so-called what is wrong object or object error debate, I have been critical. In fact, we artificially determine the nature of a thing is not what axiological significance, recognize the error on the so-called facts "Object Error" and "object error" the relationship between the issues, I believe that only in the discussion of how specific cases explore off at only practical significance.
awareness model based on our established above, we can carry out the following logical reasoning:
1. Harm behavior, the behavior of the man purported to be conducted due to reasons other than their will, is not complete. That is to protect the object A and did not suffer the perpetrator purported behavior may be caused by infringement.
2. Error occurred, the perpetrator's behavior points to the crime object B, and the actual carry, and ultimately damage the object of protection B.
3. In the protection of the object A and object of protection there are at least two such relations between the B, A == A == protect the object B protection object B and object of protection is the object of protection. Actually exist in the latter three cases, namely the protection of the object A and object of protection B did not have any relationship to protect the object A contains the protected object B B contains the protected object A and object of protection. , Where mutual contains too complex will not be discussed, we address only the simplest case, i.e. the two are equal and unequal both cases discussed.
 1/3    1 2 3 Next Last
Please consciously abide by Internet-related policies and regulations.
Tips: Log in to comment, the user name to enter comments directly from your personal space, so that more friends to meet you.

Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links

Top