On The Case Of He Mou Suspected Of Intentional Injury

With the rapid development of the society,minors are more and more frequently to be forced or abetted to crime by adults.Judicial practice will face a series of complex problems,such as how to identify the criminal responsibilities of the abettor adults and the minors who participate in the joint crime;how to identify the minors'statements,whether they can adopt letters,and so on.In this paper,He Mou deliberately hurt the victim,analysis of the two main points in the dispute.First,do He Mou and He Mouheng constitute a joint crime?There is mainly two kinds of opinions towards this dispute,one is that,the people who would constitute a joint crime shall be over 14 years and shall not be without criminal responsibility.He Mouheng was 12 years old when he did the crime,so he could never constitute a joint crime with He Mou.The second opinion which is hold by a lot of scholars represented by Zhang Mingkai believes that the age is not a necessary factor of determining a joint crime,instead,the illegality should be the main factor that determines a joint crime.Though He Mouheng was under the age of 14,he could constitute a joint crime with He Mou.The case of the dispute two,that is,whether the cloud should be responsible for the death of He Mouxin.In judicial practice,it is generally assumed that an actor in a joint crime is responsible for the offense committed by an accomplice,usually from the "causal relationship","beyond the scope of the expectations","limit" and other theories analysis.He Mou is responsible for the death of He Mouxin,the author also from the above several theories,one by one in the above theoretical background,He Mou whether the death of He Mouxin responsible for the study,the conclusion is He Mou behavior and He Mouxin's death is not between the physical or psychological causal relationship;He Mouheng in anxious with a stone to kill the victim He Mouxin's behavior completely beyond the He Mou should be expected,may foresee the scope;He Mou,He Mouheng implementation of the murder Behavior,this is completely unaware of,do not meet the conditions of the implementation of the limit,He Mou only to instigate He committed to the crime and the consequences of crime,not the responsibility of the death of He Mouxin.Comprehensive analysis of the two controversial points,I think He Mou case,the court of first instance of the crime committed by He Mou in qualitative and sentencing are accurate without flaws.He Mou as a mother,but with her husband feelings of instigation of their minors son to crime,which cannot help but cause the author of modern society,the juvenile delinquency of the initial thinking.The age of juvenile mental maturity tends to be younger,and the author elaborates on the end of the article and the necessity of reducing the age of criminal responsibility in our country is analyzed.