Research On Some Disputable Issues Of Pick-pocketing Theft

As a type of property crime, larceny has been the key field of legislation andjudicature for a long time. With the development of society, the issue in theDetermination of larceny is increasing. In order to apply the provisions of"Criminal Law" on larceny and crack larceny, the Supreme People’s Court and theSupreme People’s Procuratorate have successively promulgated judicialinterpretation of the judicial application of larceny. In the Criminal Law Amendment(VIII)（2011）, the limitations of amount and plot have been deleted from theprovision of pick-pocketing, which embodies the determination of legislator tocrackdown the pick-pocketing". This paper will research on two aspects of pick-pocketing, one is the elements of pick-pocketing and the other is the judicialdetermination of accomplished crime, they are also the mainly problems in thejudicial application.To solve those two problems above, We should first understand the reasons ofthe legislation provisions the pick-pocketing for the crime. We can know the reasonsfrom the analysis of the legislation history of the "pick-pocketing", it is because ofthe serious social harmfulness of "pick-pocketing" to our society is more and moreheavy and the severely infringing the rights of the citizen’s personal property, thenature of the “pick-pocketing” is from the general illegal behavior evolved intocrime, therefore the legislature consider it is necessary to punish such criminalbehavior. It is great significant to make a distinguish between the “pick-pocketing”and the ordinary theft when we identified the "pick-pocketing" theft. In2013, TheSupreme People’s Court and The Supreme People’s Procuratorate carried out a newjudicial interpretation of theft crime. It shall be deemed to be "pick-pocketing" thatthe perpetrator theft the property which people have carried on in public place or onpublic transports. It should be cognizanced as ordinary behavior of larceny if thecriminal offence are not happened in public place. Because of the criminal law doesnot regulate a definite provision of pick-pocketing, lots of scholars and judges insist that the conditions of criminal composition and accomplished crime have the samestandards. Obviously, this viewpoint does not accord with the objective of legislationand has suspicion of invasive human rights. We can not simply consider that thepick-pocketing belongs to behavioral offense when judge pick-pocketing is acriminal behavior or not. Considering pick-pocketing is one of the behaviors oflarceny, it should have the identical characteristics with larceny. Both of them areconsequential offense. Accomplished crime or attempted crime should be judgedfrom the angle of consequential offense. Although pick-pocketing is a new type oflarceny, it has been a long time in our country. With the development of economic,the changes of the behavior pattern of pick-pocketing results the crossover betweenpick-pocketing and other types of larceny. It is necessary to judge the nature ofbehavior reasonably, as it has great practical significance to conviction andsentencing.This paper mainly uses the following research methods: the method oftheoretical analysis, the method of inductive research and the case analysis.