Features
Features:

Product Tour >

Edraw AI >

Paid Plans:

Individuals >

Business >

Eduaction >
Resources
Blog

History

How-tos & Tips

Discovery

Biography

Business Analysis

Examples

AI concept Map

Free AI Mind Map Generator

Onenote Mind Map

Bcg Matrix Examples

Nike Marketing Strategy

Unilever SWOT Analysis

Make Mind Maps in Google Docs

Guide

FAQs

What's New

Resource Center
Templates
All Templates

Brain Storming Templates

Strategy and Planning Templates

Project Management Templates

Product Management Templates

Human Resources Templates

Agile Workflow Templates

Marketing Templates

Education Templates

Fun and Games Templates

User Gallery
Download
Pricing
Enterprise

joint crime

This is a mind map about joint crime. Joint crime refers to two or more people committing a deliberate crime together. It is suitable for exam review!

Edited at 2024-04-19 21:55:46

PlotWizard

Recent works View more works>>

joint crime

PlotWizard

Recent works View more works>>

Recommended to you
Outline

joint crime

Classification of joint crimes

joint crime

principal offender

In terms of quantity, they are divided into: single principal offender/joint principal offender

In terms of method, it is divided into: direct principal offender/indirect principal offender

accomplice

Criminal boss

accomplice

Relationship between principal and accomplice

accomplice affiliation

The independence of accomplices believes that the conviction of instigators and helpers should be judged independently, without considering whether the perpetrators committed a crime

Subordination of accomplices (official position of the Legal Examination): The perpetrator’s crime is a prerequisite for the instigator and helper to commit the crime.

Subordinate attributes of criminal forms: 1. The principal offender did not commit the crime, and the accomplice is not guilty. 2. When the principal offender is in the preparation stage, the crime is suspended; the accomplice constitutes preparation for the crime. 3. The principal offender is in the preparatory stage, preparing to commit a crime; the accomplice constitutes preparation for a crime 4. When the principal offender is in the execution stage, the crime is suspended; the accomplice constitutes an attempted crime. 5. The principal offender attempted the crime during the execution stage; the accomplice constituted an attempted crime. 6. When the principal offender is in the execution stage, the crime is completed; the accomplice constitutes the completion of the crime.

The nature of joint crime

Substantive principle: The violation of the law is together and the responsibility is independent. Joint crime is actually a special phenomenon of the objective class. It is actually only the task of the objective class to judge whether two people constitute a joint crime.

"Sameness" of form: Let's create illegal facts together

The theory of common crime: The theory of complete common crime requires complete consistency between subjectivity and objectivity, and the viewpoint has been eliminated. The theory of partial joint crime only requires that two people have some similarities. Not required to be convicted of the same crime

Theory of common behavior (majority): As long as the perpetrators jointly create illegal facts and the illegality is common, it is a joint crime. In particular, it does not require that the elements of the subjective class remain the same, nor does it require that the same crime be convicted.

joint offender

Objective illegal class: "Partial implementation, full responsibility" principle,

Subjective responsibility class: 1. No requirement for age of responsibility 2. No requirement for responsibility ability 3. There is no requirement for intentionality or negligence.

Part of the theory of joint crime: two people are jointly guilty, subjectively it must be intentional and not negligent. Negligent crimes are not enough to be jointly culpable, and we do not agree with "negligent joint culprits"

Theory of common conduct (majority theory): The establishment of joint perpetrators only requires a connection of intention in the objective illegal class. As for the subjective responsibility class, the responsibility is independent, that is, the joint principal perpetrators agree with the negligence.

indirect culprit

objective class

coercive means

Forcing others to commit a crime

Forcing the victim to commit self-destructive behavior

deception

Deceiving others and taking advantage of others' mistakes, for example, a doctor gives a poisonous needle to a nurse, and the nurse uses it on the patient without checking based on trust.

To deceive others and take advantage of others' intentional behavior. For example, A asks B to hit the screen. In fact, C is behind the screen and wants B to beat C to death.

Deceiving the victim into committing self-destructive behavior

Supervisory level: It must be intentional, and the indirect principal offense is instigating, exploiting, and dominating

Criminal boss

objective illegal class

The conditions for establishing an abettor: the abetment behavior causes the principal offender’s illegal behavior

If another person already has the intention to commit a certain crime, instigating him to commit the crime does not constitute an instigator, because there is no relationship between causing and being caused.

Others already have the intention to commit a misdemeanor and instigate others to commit a felony, which constitutes an instigator of a felony

If someone already has the intention to commit a felony, instigating others to commit a misdemeanor of the same nature does not constitute an instigator because the risk to legal interests is reduced.

Someone who already has the intention to commit a felony and instigates others to commit a misdemeanor of a different nature constitutes an instigator of the misdemeanor crime.

Accomplished conditions for instigating offenders: the instigating behavior causes the illegal consequences of the principal offender

Subjective responsibility level: requires subjective intentionality

Caused by negligence, does not constitute an instigator

Intentional instigation cannot be committed and does not constitute instigation. For example, A gives B an empty gun and asks B to shoot C who is far away.

accomplice

objective illegal class

Conditions for establishment: Helping behavior promotes the principal offender to commit illegal acts

Accomplished condition: Helping behavior promotes the principal offender to create illegal results

Psychological help: psychological promotion for the principal offender, such as lookout

Subjective responsibility class: Requires subjective intention to help

Neutral helping behavior: 1. Whether subjectively you know that the other party is committing a crime; 2. Whether the objective behavior has played a substantial and urgent role in promoting the other party's crime.

Participation time in joint crime

Halfway Involved: Inherited Co-Crime

Exit midway: separation from accomplice relationship, withdrawal requirements

Instigate the offender: give up the intention to commit the crime

Helping offenders: eliminating physical and psychological contributions

Co-offender: In the preparatory stage, physical and psychological contributions must be eliminated; in the execution stage, the other party must be effectively prevented from committing the crime.

Special issues of joint crime

One-sided (unilateral) joint crime

One-sided help. For example, A wanted to kill C, but saw B chasing C, and secretly set up a rope to trip C (slightly injured). B successfully killed C and did not know that A helped him.

Definitely say: A constitutes B's one-sided accomplice to the crime of intentional homicide, and the crime here is one-sided.

Negative theory: A does not constitute an accomplice, and the opponent is dealt with separately, but A only caused minor injuries to C, which does not constitute a crime. This statement is unreasonable, so I turned to the affirmative statement.

Implemented comprehensively. A learned that B wanted to rape C, so he knocked C unconscious in advance and then exited. B successfully raped the woman, but did not know that it was A who knocked the woman unconscious.

Definitely (majority): 1. A has the awareness to participate in B's crime and should be responsible for B's illegal facts. Combined with his own violent behavior, he constitutes the one-sided perpetrator (principal offender) of B's crime of rape. 2. B constitutes a separate crime of rape.

Negative theory (minority): 1. A does not constitute a partial perpetrator of B's crime of rape, but constitutes a separate crime of intentional injury, but A constitutes a partial accomplice of B's crime of rape. A is a one-sided accomplice who triggers the crime of intentional injury and rape at the same time. Imagine competing and choosing one. 2. B constitutes a separate crime of rape

Joint crime and status offender

1. Among real identity criminals, only those with identity are qualified to constitute execution offenders, and those without identity can only constitute accomplices (teachers or gangsters) 2. A person with an identity must constitute an execution offender, and the execution act must be carried out 3. Analysis path: Analyze each person separately. If two crimes are committed at the same time, imagine competing and choosing one.

Joint crime and crime of omission: the act of omission as an obligor constitutes an accomplice crime if not instigated/aided by the obligor; the act committed by someone other than the obligor and the assistance of the omission of the obligor constitutes an accessory crime.

The judgment standard for joint crime and excessive execution is to see whether it exceeds the scope of common intention. Exceeding responsibility.

Common crime and misunderstanding

Common culprit: first determine the type of cognitive error and then analyze it

Instigating or assisting the offender. Principal offender: first determine the type of cognitive error and then analyze it.

Accomplices become victims: analysis of accomplices one by one

Do you admit being a co-culprit in negligence? For example, A and B discuss shooting a wild boar together and accidentally kill passerby C. There is only one fatal bullet in C's body. It is impossible to find out who shot it.