Causal Process Deviation Research

Causal process deviation refers to the situation that the perpetrator objectively causes the result of constitutive elements and subjectively has the intention of constitutive elements,but the actual causal process between the criminal act and the actual harm result is not consistent with his expectation.The theory of cause-and-effect process deviation is difficult,which is recognized as a major problem in criminal jurisprudence.Scholars at home and abroad have made a lot of useful exploration on it,and formed some research results,but due to their different value orientations,the opposition is irreconcilable.There are different understandings on the two key issues,whether the content of intentional cognition should include causality and whether subjective imputation is necessary,according to this difference the existing views can be divided into subjective intentional theory,objective imputation theory and subjective imputation theory.According to the view that the content of intentional cognition should not include causality,the actor should at least recognize the danger.In fact,the danger and causality are two sides of the same body.Therefore,on this issue,the seemingly opposing views are essentially unified,and the difference is only in the expression.Subjective imputation has independent value,which can re-examine the results after objective imputation and intentional determination,not only in the causal relationship between deviation of the occasion,but also in all criminal convictions,but on other occasions,it was apparent that the objective results attributable to the subjective intent to the conclusion which it’s not highlight its importance.The objective imputation criteria mainly include "comparable causality theory" and"objective imputation theory",both of them are developed according to attribution first and then imputation.However,in attribution judgment,the former has the concept of performing behavior,while the latter contains the evaluation of behavior in the imputation part.The theory of suitable causal relation has a certain arbitrariness to the explanation of "comparable causality",which may lead to the situation that causality can be deduced from the conclusion backwards.Although the objective imputation theory is also questioned for its objectivity due to the "thorn" problem of "special cognition",its judgment standard is more clearly and its reasoning is more clearly.Therefore,it is more reasonable to adopt "objective imputation theory".Subjective imputations criteria,such as behavioral plan theory,intentional risk theory,behavioral risk mechanism theory and constitutive requirement conformity theory,have certain defects and should not be used.Referring to the concept of meaning representation of legal acts in the field of civil law,the intention is divided into three levels,of meaning of action,meaning of expression and meaning of effect.According to the effect meaning of the actor,whether the ob jective result can be attributed to the subjective intention,and the perspective of the judge is changed to that of the actor.It can avoid the irreconcilable conflict between legal conformity theory and concrete conformity theory based on different value positions and draw a relatively reasonable conclusion.Causal process deviation can be divided into two types:causal process path deviation and causal process endpoint deviation.There is only one behavior in the narrow sense of causality error and strike error,the difference lies in the different scope of the concept of criminal object,both of which belong to the path deviation of causal process.There are two behaviors(including the behavior of assumption),delayed occurrence of results and advance of results.The difference is that the actor has different understanding of the time point of the result.Both of them belong to the end point deviation of the causal process.The analysis of each type of deviation of causal process should be carried out in accordance with objective imputation.intentional imputation and subjective imputation.