On The Criminal Determination Of Letting Others Assume The Punishment After Traffic Offence

Committing traffic offence and then passing the buck to others is the kind of actthat letting others assume the legal liability after committing traffic accident in orderto evade the responsibility. There are several main characteristics of this act, first, it iscomplex; second, it is accidental; third, the object of the criminal act is compound;and fourthly, there exist interest relationship or kinship between the actors. Based onwhether behaviors have left the crime scene, the criminal act can be divided intobuck-passing afterwards and buck-passing on the spot. Based on the relationshipbetween the actor and the assumer, the criminal act can be separated into kinship typeand interest type. Based on the identity of the assumer, the criminal act can beclassified into codefendants act and third person act. Currently there are three viewson the traffic accident scapegoat act,"traffic accident crime","combined punishmentof traffic accident crime and the crime of concealing the murder ", and "combinedpunishment of traffic offences and hamper the witness crimes". The first theory heldthat the behavior of letting others bear the punishment is in correspondence with thetheory of later no penalty theory. The second view contended that the traffic offenderand the cover-up one constitute the joint crime. The offender is the instigator of thecrime of concealing the murder. The third view explained that the act meet theconstitutive requirements of the crime of hampering the witness. Thus the offendershould be condemned as traffic accident crime and sabotage to testify crime. Thescholars held different opinions about this criminal act on the ground of differentreasons and evidences, however almost all of which held divergent contradicts anddeficiency to some extent.In order to accurately determine the nature of traffic accident and the later askingothers undertaking criminal acts, we need to clarify the relevant problems fromdifferent theories first. For example, the passive act of not saving the victim at thecriminal scene after committing the traffic offence can constitute the crime of causing traffic casualties and escaping; the criminal actors himself cannot be the subject of thecrime of concealing the murder; the act of asking others bear the punishment of trafficoffence does not conform to later no penalty theory; the criminal actor and theassumer cannot be the subject of the joint crime on the ground of the theory ofinstigator crime; the act of instigating others to give false testimony in hamperingwitness crime consist of requesting and instigating means and so on, and the “others”does not include the codefendants; there is no absorption relation between the act oftraffic offence and the act of passing the buck to others. From the above analysis,Committing traffic offence and passing the buck to others must be tackled underdifferent circumstances.