Rigging, Drinking Too Much To Cheat People Kill Behavior

Stir-up-trouble crime in law "random", "serious" and "bad" such relatively obscure words to decorate, and in the judicial practice, specific stir-up-trouble crime behavior, and easily confused with other similar crime, interference of such cases the referee of the judge. Therefore, it is necessary to carry on comparative analysis to the content of the concrete constitutive requirements for it, for the problem of practical operation. This case drinking behavior person to deceive the victim, the victim died as a result, a cause-and-effect relationship between behavior and the result is the requirement that responsible person, the premise of the author on how to apply a causality theory that put forward views and causal relations as the causation cognizance method to the case. Plus in this case the offender kill excessive drinking behavior to cheat people involved and overconfident negligence to distinguish indirect intent, this article in to distinguish between the two, on the basis of the theory of subjective mentality, put forward the distinguish between the two, in order to solve the case dispute, to correct the criterions for the conviction of the parties at the same time, hope can in practice to distinguish indirect intent from overconfident negligence help, in order to realize maximize the value of criminal law.The full text is divided into four parts, about twenty thousand words. Most of the first is the basic orientation of the case, including the cause of action, case is introduced, and the case of disagreement and controversy four parts. Controversy on the case, the main list person entire case the behavior of two kinds of different opinions: first, to the offender random beatings, strong property dispute. A view that the offender multiple random beatings, strong property, just antisocial behavior, the crime of creating disturbances. Another is that actor’s behavior of robbery. Second of all, the behavior person to deceive others to kill people drinking too much controversy. One is behavior person to deceive the victim behavior and drinking too much whether a causal relationship between the victim death results, 2 it is behavior person to deceive the victim drinking behavior’s subjective point of view, the first opinion, drinking drunken behavior person knowing that others are still deceive others, let others alcohol poisoning cause fatal injury consequences, subjective is indirect intent. A second opinion, the offender recognition results may occur, but trust can avoid, is overconfident negligence crime. A third opinion argue, excessive drinking behavior person to deceive others behavior is the continuation of before stir-up-trouble behavior, should not be alone convicted.The second most is combined with case analysis of the legal. Of the perpetrator is a random beatings, strong property of behavior analysis. Respectively in the "random", "beat" and rigging property analysis, on the basis of comprehensive considered this case person many times, random beatings, rigging the nature of the property. The second is to behavior person to deceive others kill behavior analysis of drinking too much. From relevant causality theory, this paper from the pathological mechanism of the cause of death the victim, analysis the victim death result and behavior person to deceive the victim behavior whether a causal relationship between drinking too much. Then, in the distinction between indirect intent and overconfident negligence theory, analysis of the behavior implementation of drinking too much to cheat people person state of mind.The third most is the conclusion of the case study. According to the case involved legal analysis, comprehensive full text, the author thinks that person many times, random beatings, strong property of behavior constitute a stir-up-trouble crime, the offender to deceive the victim binge drinking behavior with a causal relationship between the victim death results, behavior person to deceive others kill belongs to negligent mentality, drinking too much should be stir-up-trouble crime and the crime of causing death investigation of criminal responsibility of the offender Yang.The fourth most is the enlightenment to the case. By analyzing the case of comprehensive, multiple perspectives, the author thinks that should perfect in practice for stir-up-trouble crime subjective aspect, especially the motivation of the content, in order to correctly apply stir-up-trouble crime. And, in the midst of the referee, should pay attention to the inconclusive content of appraisal conclusion, avoid just trust in conclusion conviction, ignore other legal issues, not conclusive qualitative effect and influence factors on the case.