Determination Of Causality Of Intentional Injury Causing Death

Aggravated consequential offence has been regarded as a remnant of consequence liability,which is suspected of violating human rights.In order to carry out the requirements of the liability doctrine,the scope of the establishment of the aggravated consequential offense should be strictly limited,and the causal relationship between the basic act and the aggravated result is the most critical path of limitation.Among them,the causal relationship,as the link between the basic act and the aggravated result of the aggravator,has been a major problem in limiting the application of the aggravator.This paper selects "intentional injury causing death" to discuss.The statutory punishment for the crime is extremely severe,even exceeding the sum of the basic offense of intentional injury and the statutory punishment for the crime of negligent causing death.Through seeking the current situation and theoretical controversies of causality in such cases,combining with overseas experiences,and analyzing the basic position and direction that should be followed in determining the causal relationship between intentional injury and death,typed causal relationship determination rules are proposed.The full paper is divided into three parts.The first part is a study of the current judicial situation and theoretical controversies.The first part is a study of the current judicial situation and theoretical controversies.The current judicial situation is divided into intervening factors and common crimes,and the crux of the causal relationship between intentional injury and death in judicial practice is analyzed in two typical situations.At the same time,the two directions of "the causal relationship between the aggravated result offender" and "the aggravated result offender and joint criminality" are organized and reviewed,and the controversial points of the causal relationship between intentional injury and death are analyzed.In judicial practice,different courts have varying standards for determining the causal relationship in such cases;lack of necessary causal reasoning and argumentation,tends to simplify the causal process;neglecting the particularity of the criteria for determining the causal relationship of aggravated consequential offenses;unclear applicable standards regarding whether each actor constitutes an accomplice at the level of aggravated consequences in joint crimes.The theory of causal relationship in criminal law is flourishing,and there is significant controversy in the academic community regarding the relationship between basic behavior and aggravated consequences,as well as how to determine the causal relationship of joint offenses with aggravated consequences,which cannot provide clear guidance standards for practical useThe second part is the basic position and direction that should be followed in determining the causal relationship between intentional injury and death.In order to regulate the causal relationship and clarify the correct direction,it is necessary to return to the essence of the resultant aggravator.The dangerousness says clearly that the aggravated crime is not a type of crime that simply has an external connection between the act and the result,but a close connection between the intrinsic wrong and the result.The determination of the causal relationship of the aggravated result offender cannot follow the standard of the general result offender’s causal relationship,but needs to be strictly limited.Based on the dangerousness theory,the author advocates that the causation of intentional injury causing death should adhere to the element of directness and incorporate the objective attribution theory.The author proposes that,the directness element can be grasped from two aspects.First,the basic act is required to have a type of special danger of aggravated results.Second,the aggravated consequential offense requires the direct actualization of the high degree of danger.At the same time,in the case of joint criminality,this paper agrees with the theory that the essence of joint criminality lies in the commonality of lawlessness.Combined with the construction of result-aggravated criminality,it proposes that the joint criminality of result-aggravated criminality requires that the aggravated result is triggered by the special risk implied in the joint criminal act that leads to the occurrence of the result,and the perpetrator and the accomplice must have a direct contribution to the risk,and the special risk implied in the joint criminal act must be directly actualized as the aggravated result.The third part is to explore the specific rules for determining the causal relationship between intentional injury and death.The second part of the analysis is to analyze some typical cases involving intervening factors and joint criminality in judicial practice,cases involving intervention factors are divided into intervening victim factors and intervening third party behavior,cases involving joint crime cases are divided into joint principal offender cases and narrow joint offender cases,which are to provide universal and specific standards for judicial practice.