Psychopathy and Female Gender: Phenotypic Expression and Comorbidity; A Study Comparing a Sample of Women Hospitalized in Italy's Maximum Security Facility with Women Who were Criminally Sentenced and Imprisoned,

Various studies have shown that women with psychopathy tend to commit crimes that are less violent than those of psychopathic men. The present study was designed to address the influence of psychopathy on the crimes committed by female offenders. A national sample of female offenders found NGRI or of diminished responsibility and at risk for criminal recidivism (OPG patients) was compared with a sample of female offenders who were convicted and imprisoned. Results of this comparison between the two groups of female offenders indicate that psychopathy is a transversal psychopathological dimension which may or may not be associated with other mental disorders. In both samples, the most commonly reported offenses among women with high PCL‐R scores were minor offenses, not particularly violent, but they appear to be related to typical psychopathic features such as superficial charm, pathological lying, and manipulation.     

责任阻却性紧急避险的厘清与适用——以受虐妇女杀夫案为视角

目前我国司法实践在处理受虐妇女杀夫案时直接进入量刑阶段,忽视了适用出罪事由实现无罪的可能性。在此类案件中,虽然因不存在正在进行的不法侵害而不能适用正当防卫,但针对危险引发者的防卫行为则可以运用其他紧急权资源。受虐妇女因无法忍受家庭暴力而杀害丈夫的行为,构成防御性紧急避险。然而紧急避险的正当化根据,不应采取功利主义的法益权衡说,而应采取社会团结义务说。即仅在理性人自愿负担的社会团结义务的限度以内才能成立违法阻却事由,因侵害生命的避险行为超出了社会团结义务的限度而无法得以正当化,但可能成立以无期待可能性为基础的责任阻却性紧急避险,这与我国《刑法》第21条的规定并不矛盾。     

Opinion 1/15 of the Grand Chamber dated 26 July 2017 about the agreement on Passenger Name Record data between the EU and Canada

On 26 July 2017, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice rendered its seminal Opinion 1/15 about the agreement on Passenger Name Record data between the EU and Canada. The Grand Chamber considered that the decision of the Council about the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the agreement between the EU and Canada about the transfer and processing of PNR data must be based jointly on Article 16(2) about the protection of personal data and Article 87(2)(a) about police co-operation among member states in criminal matters, but not on Article 82(1)(d) about judicial co-operation in criminal matters in the EU of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. The Grand Chamber also considered that the agreement is incompatible with Article 7 on the right to respect for private life, Article 8 on the right to the protection of personal data, Article 21 on non-discrimination and Article 52(1) on the principle of proportionality of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU since it does not preclude the transfer, use and retention of sensitive data. In addition to the requirement to exclude such data, the Grand Chamber listed seven requirements that the agreement must include, specify, limit or guarantee to be compatible with the Charter.The opinion of the Grand Chamber has far-reaching implications for the agreement on PNR data between the EU and Canada. It has also far-reaching implications for international agreements on PNR data between the EU and other third states. Last, it has far-reaching implications for Directive 681 of 27 April 2016 on PNR data.     

Legislative genesis and judicial death of a directive: The European Court of Justice invalidated the data retention directive (2006/24/EC) thereby creating a sustained period of legal uncertainty about the validity of national laws which enacted it

The Grand Chamber has ruled that the data retention directive was invalid ex tunc since it seriously interfered with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and protection of personal data and exceeded the limits of the principle of proportionality which are provided for in the Charter. The scope and temporal effects of this ruling should be clarified, especially its legal impacts on national laws of Member States which enacted the directive. In addition, the findings of the Grand Chamber on geographical safeguards have far-reaching implications on the retention and storage of personal data in the EU.