信用卡诈骗案件审查逮捕中的常见问题研究

对特定类别的信用卡诈骗案件,在审查逮捕时应明确罪与非罪及此罪与彼罪的界限问题;对于共犯形态的信用卡诈骗案件,审查逮捕时如发现有遗漏追究部分共同犯罪人刑事责任的情形,应通过立案监督程序建议公安机关对未立案的共犯予以立案追究;审查逮捕信用卡诈骗案件,应特别注意对诈骗数额、银行催收、退款情况以及非法占有目的四个情节方面的证据审查。     

恶意透支型信用卡诈骗案件的研究

恶意透支型信用卡诈骗案件近年来发案较多,所占信用卡诈骗罪比例最大,但恶意透支型信用卡诈骗罪在主观恶性、危害程度上均不及其他三类信用卡诈骗案件。在审查逮捕案件中,如何对此类案件证据证明标准,尤其是逮捕条件较好把握,本文从主观故意、透支数额、催收方式、逮捕必要四个方面进行了阐述。     

信用卡诈骗罪若干问题研究

信用卡诈骗,罪主要存在信用卡范围、恶意透支认定、盗窃信用卡并使用行为的定性等问题。信用卡的范围应该保持与其他部门法一致以保持法律的协调统一;恶意透支的持卡人应该采程序合法的标准,非法占有目的的认定应综合主客观因素;盗窃信用卡并使用的行为也应区分具体情况加以定性。     

电信网络诈骗及其关联犯罪案件分案处理的现实困境及完善

电信网络诈骗及其关联犯罪案件具有涉众性、犯罪行为复杂性等特点，对案件合理分案有利于提高诉讼效率，及时查明案件事实，保障对被告人公平审判。但当前我国分案处理的法律缺位、适用标准模糊、分案处理程序衔接不畅等问题，导致实践中随意分案、辩方程序性权利无法保障等情形常有发生。电信网络诈骗及其关联犯罪案件分案处理应遵循“并案为主，分案为辅”的适用原则，同时还应明确分案处理的适用情形，强化被告人质证权和辩护权等合法权利，并加强侦诉审三阶段的衔接协调。     

关于信用卡诈骗罪中数额标准问题的思考

信用卡诈骗罪 ,是指使用伪造的信用卡 ,使用作废的信用卡 ,冒用他人的信用卡 ,或者恶意透支 ,进行信用卡诈骗活动 ,数额较大的行为。关于信用卡诈骗罪的具体数额标准我国现行《刑法》未作明文规定 ,而《最高人民检察院、最高人民法院关于办理利用信用卡诈骗犯罪案件具体适用法律若干问题的解释》与最高人民法院《关于审理诈骗案件具体应用法律若干问题的解释》所规定的数额标准并不完全一致 ,这无疑影响了司法解释的权威性和严肃性。“恶意透支”与信用卡诈骗罪中的其他三种行为方式相比 ,其可能产生的社会危害后果和所反映的行为人的主观恶性均不完全相同 ,因此 ,应对“恶意透支”行为规定较“使用伪造的信用卡 ,使用作废的信用卡 ,冒用他人信用卡”行为更高的数额标准。     

对民事诉讼证据概念和分类的再思考

诉讼证据是诉讼活动的核心，但目前人们对诉讼证据概念的理解尚不尽一致，法律对诉讼证据的分类也存在某些问题，从而影响了当事人运用和法院审查判断诉讼证据。本文认为，民事诉讼证据就是民事诉讼案件证明的根据，应与民事诉讼案件证明材料有所区分。我国民事诉讼法应对民事诉讼证据重新进行分类，确保分类的科学性和可操作性，以完善我国的民事诉讼证据制度     

以案释法,浅议信用卡诈骗案件实践难点

2009年12月,最高人民法院、最高人民检察院《关于办理妨害信用卡管理刑事案件具体应用法律若干问题的解释》(以下简称《解释》)的出台,对恶意透支型信用卡诈骗犯罪的规定进一步细化.恶意透支型信用卡诈骗犯罪作为破坏金融管理秩序罪中一类高发犯罪,本文就笔者办理的此类案件的处理,兼顾法律规定及司法效率,对已决案件中出现的难点作了简要的论述.     

浅谈信用卡诈骗案件中文件检验技术的应用

近年来信用卡诈骗案件发案数居高不下,涉案金额不断增长,社会危害巨大。文件检验技术在侦破信用卡诈骗案件中具有重要作用,但在实际应用中面临诸多问题。本文指出应紧密结合检验鉴定工作与侦查工作,加强办案人员的培训,坚持科学的检验原则,以充分发挥文件检验技术在信用卡诈骗案件中的作用。     

认罪认罚从宽制度的效率实质及其实现机制

认罪认罚从宽制度本质上是权力主导的程序加速机制。国家权力对诉讼进程的强力主导、强调被追诉人的悔过态度和强调以公权力保障查明事实真相，使其根本上有别于辩诉交易。认罪认罚从宽制度下办案效率的提升，有两条主要路径。一是单位工作量的压缩。提高诉讼效率应通过简化程序环节、压缩单位案件工作量来实现，而不应单纯压缩诉讼时间；二是降低部分认罪认罚案件的证明标准。对适用速裁程序的案件，在坚守“排除合理怀疑”主观标准的同时，降低对“证据确实、充分”的客观性要求；对其他案件，应坚守通用的证明标准，但适用简易程序处理的案件，“证据确实、充分”的实际把握可能会有所降低。     

论纪检监察案件的证明标准

证明标准是对案件事实认定的评价尺度,其合理设置对诉讼程序的顺利进行以及诉讼功能的实现具有重要的影响。在监察体制改革的大背景之下,纪检监察案件证明标准存在自己独特的历史背景与特有属性。构建纪检监察案件的证明标准体系,应围绕法律价值、多样性与灵活性等考量因素,以多元化、多阶段、一致性以及主客观相结合为原则,从程序上和案件最终定性上确定纪检监察案件证明标准的应然选择,从而形成多元又统一的证明标准体系。     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Immigration,intermarriage and the changing face of Europe in the post war period

In this article we compare the propensity to intermarry of various migrant groups and their children who settled in Germany, France, England, Belgium and the Netherlands in the post-war period, using a wide range of available statistical data. We try to explain different intermarriage patterns within the framework of Alba and Nee's assimilation theory and pay special attention to the role of religion, colour and colonial background. We therefore compare colonial with non colonial migrants and within these categories between groups with ‘European’ (Christian) and non-European (Islam, Hinduism) religions. First of all, religion appears to be an important variable. Migrants whose faith has no tradition in Western Europe intermarry at a much lower rate than those whose religious backgrounds correspond with those that are common in the country of settlement. The rate of ethnic endogamous marriages in Western Europe are highest in Hindu and Muslim communities, often regardless if they came as guest workers or colonial migrants. Whereas differences in religion diminish the propensity to intermarry, colour or ‘racial’ differences on the other hand seem to be less important. This is largely explained by the pre-migration socialisation. Furthermore, the paper argues that the attention to institutions, as rightly advocated by Richard Alba and Victor Nee, needs a more refined and layered elaboration. Institutions, often as barriers to intermarriage, do not only emanate from the receiving society, but also—be it less formalized—within migrant communities. Especially religions and family systems, but also organized nationalist feelings, can have a profound influence on how migrants think about endogamy. Finally, strong pressures to assimilate, often through institutionalized forms of discrimination and stigmatization, not only produce isolation and frustrate assimilation (with resulting low intermarriage rates), but can also stimulate assimilation by 'passing' mechanisms. These factors, together with a more comparative perspective, are not completely ignored in the new assimilation theory, but—as this study of Western European intermarriage patterns stresses—deserve to be included more systematically in historical and social scientist analyses.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

Illumination,Imagination, Creativity: Rājaśekhara,Kuntaka, and Jagannātha on <Emphasis Type="Italic">Pratibhā</Emphasis>

Sanskrit poeticians make the visionary faculty of pratibhā a necessary part of the professional poet’s make-up. The term has a pre-history in Bhartṛhari’s linguistic metaphysics, where it is used to explain the unitary perception of meaning. This essay examines the relation between pratibhā and possible theories of the imagination, with a focus on three unusual theoreticians—Rājaśekhara, Kuntaka, and Jagannātha Paṇḍita. Rājaśekhara offers an analysis of pratibhā that is heavily interactive, requiring the discerning presence of the bhāvaka listener or critic; he also positions pratibhā in relation to Bildung (vyutpatti) and practice. For Kuntaka, pratibhā, never an ex nihilo creation by a poet, serves as the basis for the peculiar forms of intensified insight and experience that constitute poetry; these may also involve the creative scrambling and re-articulation of the object in terms of its systemic composition. At times, Kuntaka’s pratibhā comes close to a strong notion of imaginative process. But the full-fledged thematization of the imagination, and of pratibhā as its support and mechanism, is best seen in the seventeenth-century debates preserved for us by Jagannātha. A link is suggested between the discourse of poetic imagination in Jagannātha and similar themes that turn up in Indo-Persian poets such as Bedil.     

Preventing Homelessness for System‐Involved Youth

Too many youth and young adults find themselves on the streets, couch‐surfing with friends, in emergency shelters or worse, after exiting the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. In some circumstances, youth have had court hearings until their exit from the legal system, but those hearings have not focused on long‐range plans of youth and emergencies youth may encounter. In other circumstances, there has been little or no planning prior to discharge, especially for young people who leave the juvenile justice system. Courts can and should prevent, alleviate or end youth homelessness for youth who appear before them through strategies that are enumerated in the recently‐passed NCJFCJ resolution. This article expounds on three of these strategies – coordinating transition and re‐entry plans, insisting on effective legal representation of youth, and utilizing sound judicial leadership. It also describes the concurrent efforts of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice and the American Bar Association's Homeless Youth Legal Network to remove legal barriers and improve outcomes for youth and young adults experiencing homelessness.     

Best practices for structuring a family court parenting plan evaluation under the 2022 AFCC Guidelines

Evaluation appointment orders provide enforceable scaffolding for conduct of family court parenting plan evaluations, and use of the evaluator's reports, feedback, file, and testimony. Unlike a contract, a stipulated or adjudicated appointment order is directly enforceable by the family court. It unambiguously positions the evaluator as the family court's appointee – answerable directly to the court and, in some jurisdictions, protected by quasi-judicial immunity from damages claims. A well-crafted appointment order governs the roles and expectations of the court, the evaluator, the parties, the lawyers, and the collateral witnesses. An appointment order mandates the legal duties, rights, powers, and responsibilities of the professionals, the parties, and the collateral witnesses. At minimum, an appointment order articulates the legal basis for the appointment, the purpose and scope of the evaluation, compensation of evaluator, and the duty of the parties to participate in the process. A written evaluation protocol or procedures statement discloses in advance the methods of investigation and assessment that the evaluator intends to use. Together, the appointment order and written protocol help the evaluator, lawyers, parents, and judge manage the complexity of the evaluation process.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.