On The Criminal Case Of Yan Causing Traffic Casualties

The controversy of Yan's traffic offence criminal case made the focus of the following aspects:First, the subject of the criminal liability is the driver of the one in front(Yan) or the one behind, or both of them. Second, as for the determination of the nature and the measurement of the penalty, there are seven kinds of views. The first is Yan should not be liable for the criminal accident at all, but the driver behind should, and he also should be labeled as Hit-and-Run. The second is Yan is considered negligently causing the victim's death, and the driver behind is probably labeled as Hit-and-Run. The third is Yan has to be liable for the crime of "escaping behavior" which results in the victim's death, but the driver behind is not guilty. The forth is Yan is liable for the crime of the traffic offence along with the circumstances of escape and voluntary surrender. The fifth is much the same with the forth view, but denies Yan's circumstance of voluntary surrender. The sixth is Yan has to be considered non-action intentional murder, but the driver behind is not guilty. The last view is both of them are responsible for the crime of Hit-and-Run.The author's analyzing comes to the conclusion that the subject of criminal liability should be Yan. Since the run-over behavior of the later driver, at the time of that situation, can not be regarded as a normal intervening factor, so it can't interrupt the casual relationship between Yan's Hit-and-Run behavior and the death of the victim. In terms of the determination of the nature and the measurement of the penalty, the author is in favor of the fourth view. Firstly, the relationship between the crime of negligently causing someone's death and the crime of traffic offence is the same with the general law and special law, that's why we should be given priority to the crime of traffic offence. Secondly, the main difference between the crime of traffic offence and the crime of non-action intentional homicide in a case of traffic accident is that the subjective aspect of former is "negligence" while he is causing the traffic accident or escaping from the scene, but for the latter, he is negligent for causing the traffic accident while "indirect intentional" for the death of the victim. Third, keeping to the principle of in favor of the criminal suspect, when it is uncertain that the cause of the death is the behavior of causing the traffic accident or escaping from the scene, it's unfair to make it the crime of "escaping behavior" which results in the victim's death. Lastly, the "escaping behavior" in a traffic accident dose not influence the definition of voluntary surrender.