On Criminal Law Analysis Of Death Cases Of Slight Violence

There are few but not uncommon criminal cases each year in which the two parties who had never met before could meet,possibly because of a quarrel,a collision,an inconsistency,followed by a slight shouting,a scuffle,or even a punch or kick,which led to the death of the other party.These pushing,scuffling,punching,kicking and other acts,in general,are difficult to cause death,but the special physique of the victim is an exception.Special physique refers to the constitution different from normal people,mainly refers to the special diseases or organ diseases such as hypertension,coronary heart disease,myocardial infarction and so on.These diseases are like a time bomb,at ordinary times silent,while do not hinder people's daily life.People do not even feel its existence before erupting,but once erupting,it can take away the human life instantaneously.With the development of social economy and technology and the improvement of people's living standard,the incidence of these diseases such as time bombs is also increasing,and the death cases of victims with special physique caused by slight violence are increasing day by day.The author collected 123 judgments of slight violent death cases from OpenLaw Open Law Coalition.After reviewing the facts of the case,reading through the reasons for the judgment,and analyzing the distribution of the charges,it is found that the phenomenon of different sentences in this kind of cases is very prominent in judicial practice,and the severity of sentencing varies,mainly including intentional injury,negligence causing death and innocence,and the guilty verdict accounts for 98%of the judgments,occupying the decisive position.However,when we turn our attention to the criminal law academia,another scene will be found.Academia generally believes that the actor should be denied responsibility for the death results,as for the use of objective imputation,causality or the use of traditional methods,but the way of argument is different,does not affect the view of this kind of problem.We cannot help but ask why there are so many differences in judicial adjudication in real life,and the conviction rate as high as 98%is quite different from that of the theoretical circle which regards innocence as the principle and guilt as the exception.What is the reason behind this?The paper holds that there are mainly two types of reasons,one is social reasons,the social concept of "maintaining stability first" leads to the deviation of the functional orientation of judicial adjudication.The humanistic ideology of "the dead are the noblest" infiltrates the judicial field in a silent way,determines the attitude and position of judicial personnel,and controls the operation effect of legal procedures.On the other hand,it is the legal reasons,the lack of legal theory level of judicial staff and the fuzziness of relevant judgment standards.It mainly manifested in three aspects:Blurring the line between intentional injury and general assault;Generalized Determination of Causality between Intentional Injury and Death;The understanding of the concept of foreseeable possibility in the crime of negligence causing death is extremely abstract.The prevalence of the "result-only theory" and the broad position of subjective imputation lead to a very high rate of guilt in cases of slight violence caused by special physique victims in judicial practice.How to rectify the judicial alienation has put forward the extremely high request to the judicial personnel's theory level,the social responsibility and the bearing spirit.In response to the above-mentioned legal issues,the paper introduces and discusses the theory of executive action,causality and new and old negligence from the angle of criminal law theory.At the same time,it points out the differences and puzzles of the above theories in explaining the death cases of victims with special physique caused by slight violence.Therefore,there is an urgent need for a more reasonable and convenient theory to solve the above problems in the field of criminal law.Then the paper puts forward the condition that the action of attribution,the theory of objective imputation theory,and the act of perpetrating of using the theory of legal benefits and vicious identification of the "general person standard" can be used as the optimal principle to solve the identification of criminal responsibility.Just from principle of law,there are many reasons for the qualitative differences in cases between different courts,between prosecution and the court and between the two levels of court.The main reason is that the judicial functionary have different understandings and cognizances of the subjective fault of the perpetrator and the causality between the slight violence committed under the subjective behavior and the result of death.The objective imputation theory can solve the latter issue very well.Firstly,the causality between the behavior and the result is analyzed by the condition theory,which is the attribution and belongs to the fact judgment;Secondly,through the objective imputation theory to discuss whether the results can be attributed to behavior,which is imputation,belongs to value judgment.After experiencing attribution and imputation,it is also necessary to judge whether the case belongs to the crime of intentional homicide and intentional injury by analyzing whether the perpetrator subjectively knows that the victim is a special physique.By distinguishing whether the perpetrator has the obligation of foreseeing the result and the possibility of foreseeing the obligation of avoidance of the result,we can determine whether the case is negligent causing death or an accident,so as to achieve a fair conviction and sentencing of the defendant in the case of special physique of the victim.This paper mainly through the case analysis method,the literature research method,the comparison method and so on.It compares and analyzes the related cases,crime constitution and related concepts,summarizes the related theories,analyzes the source of qualitative disputes in such cases,and puts forward some superficial suggestions for the reasons,hoping to provide some reference for the qualitative analysis of such cases.Criminal trial is related to life and death.The determination of the nature of the case by judicial functionary is related to whether the perpetrator bears should bear the label of "offender" in this society,so it is necessary for judicial functionary to strictly abide by the law and criminal law theory and exercise their rights carefully when handling cases.