Evaluation Of Criminal Law Of Accomplice's Casualties In Joint Crimes

In the course of joint crimes,when an offender courses casualties to an accomplice,whether the conduct and outcome of the injury need to be evaluated by criminal law and how to evaluate by criminal law? This is a long-term controversial question in law profession.Scholars have put forward various theories on the issue,mostly based on a single crime or an isolated case,while few present a systematic explanation.This leads to confusion in the application of the law in judicial practice,leads to a huge difference or even conflicts of conviction and penalty among juristically similar cases.Seeing the theoretical and pragmatic urgency,this paper,focusing on the involuntary lethal or severely wounding damage to accomplices,would strive to explain the legal necessity of judging the involuntary injury to accomplices with criminal law.We will thoroughly investigate the legislative meaning and judicial implementation of the term “cause somebody severely wound or dead” in present national criminal law,aiming to clarify whether accomplices belong to the lawful “man” who “cause somebody severely wound or dead”,and looking for flaws in present law and judicial interpretation.We will furthermore refer to relative regulations of foreign laws to get a better legislative amendment of present criminal law,and to better direct judicial practice.There are some 35000 words in this paper,mainly divided into four chapters:Chapter one tries to systematically interpret the meaning of “cause somebody severely wound or dead”,going through all articles in present criminal law's specific provisions including the clear state and stipulation on the crime.We will start from the crime's presentation,constitutive elements,and essential causation,briefing the present legislative regulation on “cause somebody severely wound or dead” in national criminal law,and clarifying the legal object of “cause somebody severely wound or dead”.The second part is introduction of legislative regulation on “cause somebody severely wound or dead” in the Great Britain and the United States.And then there will be a conclusion of the main arguments on the judge of damages to accomplices in theoretical and justice pragmatic profession.Chapter two analyses the legal interest of the offender in crime,based on the conception and classification of legal interest,we will discuss and find that an offender's rights and interests are consequentially necessary legal interests.The ending parts is exploration of necessary condition on which an offender's legal interest belong to actual legal interest.Chapter three searches for legal basis to an offender's criminal responsible of involuntary damage on his accomplice.After an overview of basic of criminal responsibility,we will cite the obligee commitment theory and the crime cost theory to verify that an offender's rights of life and body are always under the protection of law,albeit during a crime.Any action causing damages to an offender's body or life should be negatively judged,unless there exists a otherwise expressly provided by law.Finally in chapter four,we will discuss the criminal responsibility of a feasor.Deduced from the argumentation in former parts,we could be convinced that an offender's rights and interests are actual legal interests,thus actions which cause an accomplice's severe wound or death should be judged by criminal law.The subsequent issue is to analyze criminal responsibility of the feasor,who intentionally carry out the joint crime while involuntary perform the damages of accomplice.The involuntary part of the action can be basically divided into subjective will and actual damage for further study.Subjective will is an offender's intentional acts and effects in a joint crime.And actual damage is the objective damages caused by offensive behavior.Elements of those two facet,except for the wound or death of accomplice,are all within the offender's expectation and should all be judged within joint crime.Nevertheless,as to the damages to accomplices,the feasor is subjectively negligent in the damages,which therefore could not be judged as part of joint crime,better to be taken apart and judged specially.So how to judge that? This paper proposes that,objectively speaking,the feasor conducted damaging behavior,which cause the result of harm or death,thus it can be identified that the criminal causation exists,and the feasor composes involuntary crime.And subjectively,the feasor conducted a single criminal behavior with the sole intention of joint crime,thus not enough to be convicted joinder of punishments for plural crimes.Hence we could compare the legal penalty between joint crime on victims and involuntary crime on accomplices,and choose the heavier crime to convict.As to other accomplices,beyond whose intention the negligent damage comes up,they couldn't be blamed criminal responsibility for damages beyond their joint crime intention.So crime and penalty for the common accomplices should be judged basing on specific conditions of the joint crimes.