携带凶器盗窃的刑法解析——对《刑法修正案（八）》的解读

《刑法修正案（八）》中新增了携带凶器盗窃按基本刑档处罚的条款。立法的规范目的在保障人权与保护法益中显然更为注重后者,即在侵害财产之外,因携带凶器盗窃可能对人身权利造成侵害,而将其独立规定为一种盗窃罪的特殊形态,但不能因它对人身造成的侵害危险,而将其认定为危险犯。携带凶器盗窃属于行为犯,依然是对财产的犯罪。应当在行为犯的框架下,判断携带凶器盗窃的未遂形态,并严格界定携带凶器盗窃与携带凶器抢夺的法条关系。     

抽象危险犯的扩张限缩与刑法谦抑性——兼评《刑法修正案(八)》的抽象危险犯立法

《刑法修正案(八)》将危险驾驶罪和生产销售假药罪规定为抽象危险犯,反映了风险社会下刑罚早期化的趋势,与刑法谦抑性发生一定的冲突。应当肯定修正案对抽象危险犯的扩张具有一定的合理性,但其扩张并非无边无界,为防止其过分扩张需要从立法论和解释论两方面对其施加一定的限缩。     

人身死亡损害赔偿立法探析

人身死亡损害赔偿关系到受害人生命权的体现和间接受害人财产权和精神损害请求权的实现。合理的赔偿制度是实现受害人权利的基础。中国人身死亡损害赔偿立法应反映法律公平公正价值,符合中国国情。     

论正当防卫的必要限度

随着社会利益本位说的发展,正当防卫的必要限度成为刑法理论界的一个新的问题。对于防卫行为应如何界定其限度？应该从哪些方面来界定正当防卫的必要限度？在界定的时候有什么具体的标准？这些,都是正当防卫理论中应该探讨的问题。正当防卫的必要限度是正当防卫与防卫过当的分水岭,关于正当防卫的必要限度在英美法系、大论法系以及我国的刑法界都有成熟的理论,但是在司法实践中却存在着标准难以把握的问题。因此,在司法实践中应该有一个明确具体的标准来界定正当防卫的必要限度。     

确立刑讯逼供者对受害人的损害赔偿责任

刑讯逼供是一种恶意侵犯公民人身权利的违法行为。在刑讯逼供者是否应当向受害人承担损害赔偿责任的问题上,许多国家和地区的立法持肯定态度,如英国、美国、法国及我国台湾地区。为充分填补受害人的损害,惩罚和遏制刑讯逼供的不法行为,我国应当确立刑讯逼供者对受害人的损害赔偿责任制度。该制度的确立应当从完善国家赔偿法和民法的有关规定来进行。     

Conduct and its Consequences: Attempts at Debiasing Jury Judgments

Jurors in negligence cases are supposed to judge a defendant by the reasonableness of his or her conduct and not by the consequences of that conduct. But several studies have shown that a cognitive heuristic known as hindsight bias can skew post hoc judgments of some prior behavior. Thus, jurors who must evaluate the actions of a defendant may be influenced inappropriately by the consequences of those actions. A complementary problem arises when jurors must evaluate the injuries incurred by the plaintiff. Here, jurors' knowledge about the defendant's allegedly negligent conduct can proactively influence their assessment of the plaintiff's injuries and determination of damages. The purpose of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of two procedural techniques intended to reduce or eliminate the impact of hindsight bias in negligence cases—multiple admonitions from a judge about the proper use of evidence—and bifurcation (actually withholding irrelevant evidence from jurors). We presented a re-enacted automobile negligence trial to 355 jury-eligible adults drawn from the community, varied the evidence and instructions that they heard, and measured liability judgments and damage awards from individual jurors both before and after deliberating, and from juries. Results showed that admonitions were generally ineffective in guiding jurors to the proper use of evidence but that bifurcation was relatively more effective. Deliberations had no curative effect on jurors' misapplication of evidence.     

论医患纠纷损害赔偿范围的确定--对《医疗事故处理条例》第49条的质疑

<医疗事故处理条例>与民事法律原则以及审判实践的冲突,造成当前患者获得司法救济的困难,同时法官在审判中遭遇诸多难题.本文通过解释医疗损害方面的概念,引用最新的案例,对国内相关法律的比较分析,以及论述鉴定对裁判的不当影响,从几个角度对"不属于医疗事故不赔偿"观点进行否定.并针对医学会鉴定的缺陷,提出法官审理案件中3种可行的方法限制鉴定机构的权限;事故鉴定结论仅为证据;司法鉴定、医学会鉴定、法官共同判断侵权事实.     

Now wash your hands: uncommissioned art and gender

Examining the urban arts in the UK, in their paint and fibre-based alternatives, this article aims to account for the differences in contemporary dealings with graffiti and yarn-bombing (kniffiti). The intersectional complications of gender, race, age and class, as they have come to bear on the visual arts, as well as the historical power structures that have determined the classification of crime, and of art, are offered as possible rationales for present-day handling of ‘deviance’ in the form of urban art. It seems that urban knitting has blind-sighted both social conventions and legal principles in a way that exposes the arbitrary nature of both.     

浅论精神损害之国家赔偿

国家侵权精神损害赔偿制度是衡量一个国家民主法治水平的重要尺度之一。完善国家赔偿中精神损害赔偿是维护宪法权威、建立法治社会的需要，是坚持以人为本、构建和谐社会的需要，是融入世界潮流、适应历史发展的需要。实践中，构建精神损害国家赔偿制度必须从赔偿的范围、方式、标准、程度等方面入手，切实保证国家赔偿渠道通畅，保障公民的合法权益不受侵害。     

“索拉娅案”评注——德国民法中对损害一般人格权的非物质损害的金钱赔偿

德国《民法典》对损害一般人格权的非物质损害的赔偿并没有进行规定,它是德国法中一项典型的判例法制度。联邦宪法法院通过“索拉娅案”的判决,确认了以往的审判实践和学说所建立的“一般人格权”法律制度的基本原则。通过对该判决书内容的研究,即可了解这一制度在德国发展的历史、当前的基本形态以及未来的趋势。