Identification Of Criminal Responsibility In The Death Case Of A Victim Of Idiosyncratic

Criminal cases have also become more diversified and complicated in the continuous development of the economy and society,and cases similar to those that harm the idiosyncratic person have occurred from time to time.The particularity of such cases is that the victim has an idiosyncratic trait that causes serious consequences of death after being subjected to minor injuries by the perpetrator.Such cases have caused a lot of controversy in judicial practice.There are differences between the theoretical and practical circles in the conviction and sentencing of such cases,and they also have a high degree of attention in all walks of life.The academic circles have not cut off the study on the death of idiosyncratic victims,but there is still no unified theory and principle in the debate.The handling of such cases in judicial practice is still freely decided by the case-handler.For example,when the perpetrator is subjectively acquitted and the death is caused only by the victim's own physique,it is not appropriate to convict and criminalize the perpetrator.This will not only reduce the quality of the case,but also damage the authority and credibility of the judiciary,and is not conducive to the protection of human rights.Therefore,it is necessary to analyze the special intervention situation of the victim's idiosyncratic physique and determine the causal relationship in the case to accurately criminalize the behavior of the actor.This is also to avoid the abuse of the state's penal power,so as to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the accused,in order to better play the function of the criminal law.By consulting relevant materials,we learned that there have been many cases of death of idiosyncratic victims in recent years.The author selected four typical cases for in-depth analysis in this article.The cases all went through the second instance,including the case of Shanxi's “intentional injury case”.Shandong Province's “Liu's negligent death”,Guangdong's “Liu Renliang,Jiang Xiaoyu's intentional injury case” and Henan's “Xu Fuxiu's intentional injury case”,but different courts' qualitative and criminal liability determination of the above cases There are different degrees of difference.In order to explore the root causes of conviction and sentencing disputes in such cases,and to solve the problem of "different judgments in the same case" in practice,this paper analyzes the case in a case-by-case manner and summarizes the main points of controversy.It is divided into four parts.The first part determines whether the specific constitution affects the causal relationship between the beating behavior and the death result;the second part judges whether the specific constitution affects the actor's sin;the third part solves the qualitative problem of the trait victim's death case;the fourth part analyzes the victim The idiosyncratic influence on the defendant's criminal responsibility.First of all,from the perspective of objective aspects,it is determined that the act of injury committed by the perpetrator is a harmful act on criminal law.Through the analysis of the different theories of causality identification in criminal law,it is determined that the causal relationship in the case of identifying the death of idiosyncratic victims should adopt the "conditional theory",and then conclude that there is a causal relationship between the behavior and the result in the case.Further analysis of the subjective sin of the perpetrator,based on the subjective mentality of his intention or negligence,the final qualitative analysis of the case,and the general rules for confirming the nature of such cases in practice.Finally,according to the above analysis,the impact of the specific physique on criminal responsibility is discussed.At the same time,the paper analyzes the case and attempts to draw general conclusions about the handling of such cases.Through the analysis of this case,some suggestions are also made in the process,in order to better handle the conviction and sentencing in such cases in criminal justice practice.