The Qualitative Research Of Criminals Forcing Victim To Get Money From The Third Person

In recent years, with the expanding gap between rich and poor and popularization of legal knowledge, reconnaissance consciousness of criminals anti of kidnapping and robbery appear more and more strong. The amount of money trapped in crime is larger and larger. The judicial authorities who are handling this kind of cases often meet characteristics of the crime of kidnapping. Criminals force victim to get money from a third person. Because this kind of crime does not directly to the victim's personal safety, it has high concealment . Criminals force victim to ask a third person to raise property with many kinds of excuses, which is different from the same kind of crime before. I n this way criminals can get more property than before.If they can not reach their illegal purpose cases, they will take further measure to control the personal freedom of victim to get more money. So this kind of crimine is harmful.Because this kind of crime is the different from typical kidnapping, and it do not include typical characteristics of typical robbery. Provisions of Our country criminal law on the crime of kidnapping are fuzzy, this brings a lot of confusion to judicial organ. I will set Mr Li's case as an example.With the comparison and study on different theories on the object and accomplishment standards of kidnapping and robbery, we can get the right conclusion which conform to the legal spirit to provides useful advice to judicial organs in the treatment of this kind of case. This article can be divided into three parts:The first part contain the basic situation of the case. In this part,we will set Mr Li as a example to introduce the cause of the case and the content of the case to discuss meaning of the case which can be Controversy over the case. We will know whether infringing upon the third person with self-determination is nessarily. Which is necessary goods about "on the spot" in robbery hook .The second part is the central issue of theoretical analysis. there are four different kinds of understanding theory on sentence of "for the purpose of subjective and objective" about kidnapping : a single object and single behavior theory, complex object and a single object for the composite behavior theory, complex object and composite behavior theory. Combining with judicial organs of handling cognitive law I thinks kidnapping infringement is complicated, in which the objective behavior is composite behavior. So the composition of the kidnapping by infringing upon the third person must be right to self-determination for necessary.there are three theories on spot about robbery at present in our country: law semantic theory, expansion theory, negative theory. I thinks the understanding of taking property on the spot can not be limited to the judicial interpretation of "at the same time, the same place", through the comparative analysis. As long as criminal take people under control with violence in the criminal suspect ,the behavior and purpose action of criminal has the causality and taking the goods on the spot is right.The third part is about advice and suggestions qualitative criminal legislation on the case of Mr Li. Through the analysising above, Mr Li's behaviour constitute a "detention" type robbery.Through the analysising above, Mr Li's behaviour constitute a "detention" type robbery.