Simultaneous Homicide–Suicide: A Case Report of Double Drowning

Homicide–suicide is a tragic phenomenon which typically does not result in a criminal charge or trial. However, correct diagnosis and classification of homicide–suicide cases are important to determine the perpetrators and dynamics of each category properly. The deaths in the homicide–suicide acts can be divided into two categories with respect to the number of involved individuals: dyadic deaths and triple or multiple deaths. These two categories can also be divided into two subgroups according to the chronology of the incidents: simultaneous deaths and consecutive deaths. Herein, a simultaneous homicide–suicide case of a father and daughter where both deaths occurred through drowning which was not found in the selected literature review and where the victim was a child is presented. The article aims to clarify the term discrepancies about multiple death cases in the literature and to discuss the pathological and psychosocial characteristics of the simultaneous dyadic death cases.     

Sharp Force Injury Fatalities: A Retrospective Study (1982–2012) in Brescia (Italy)

A retrospective study was carried out on postmortem examination data of 131 sharp force‐related casualties recorded by the Brescia Institute of Forensic Medicine between 1982 and 2012. The objective was to identify relevant parameters that may be used to distinguish the manner of deaths between homicide, suicide, and accident. The following variables were considered: manner of death; demographic data; scene; type of sharp object; location and numbers of wounds; the presence of hesitation marks/defense wounds; toxicological findings; psychiatric history. There were 92 homicides, 28 suicides, and 11 accidents. Most victims were male, with an average age of 43. Injuries in isolation were present in 9.8% of homicides, in 35.7% of suicides, and in 54.5% of accidents. Most injuries involved the left anterior chest in homicides and the forearms in suicides. This study underlines the importance of a meticulous postmortem examination of injuries on the body and their relationship with other results from the death scene investigation.     

Sudden Death in Marfan Syndrome

Marfan syndrome is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder of the connective tissue. The most serious complications of this syndrome are defects of the heart valves and aorta. Aneurysms of thoracic aorta are known to develop in Marfan syndrome. Other causes for development of aneurysms of the thoracic aorta are trauma, infections, valve and arch anomalies, genetic disorders, and atherosclerosis. These aneurysms upon rupture may lead to sudden deaths. They are usually detected during routine screening or follow‐up of such persons suffering from Marfan syndrome and upon death will be certified by the treating physician. Thus, an autopsy surgeon rarely comes across such deaths. One such case of sudden death due to cardiac tamponade consequent upon rupture of dissecting aortic aneurysm in a 33‐year‐old male who complained of throbbing pains in the chest, radiating to back, became breathless, cyanotic and died on the way to hospital is being presented here.     

火场中尸体的法医学分析

火场中的尸体是法医病理工作者较常见的案件,在这种案件中,判断是生前烧死还是死后焚尸具有非常重要的意义。本文就相关文献关于火灾死亡案件的尸体内部、外部征象、现场特点、以及以COHb为主的实验室结果加以综述,目的在于阐明这些特征在实际案件中的作用和应用,为法医工作者解决此类案件提供参考。     

不法原因给付与诈骗罪

不法原因给付是一个在理论上颇具争议的问题,尚缺乏必要的深入研究。不法原因给付与诈骗罪在认定上的最大障碍源于刑法与民法在一定程度上的冲突,即在此类案件中,民法与刑法的价值导向是不同的。但若本着"刑法看行为,民法看关系"这一刑民关系的基本观点,并以此作为切入点,则不法原因给付与诈骗罪之间的模糊地带将变得清晰起来,即民法虽然不保护不法原因给付,但刑法着眼于行为人的行为符合诈骗罪的构成,仍应认定骗取不法原因给付的行为构成诈骗罪。     

个体型恐怖犯罪刍议

个体型恐怖犯罪是我国在社会转型时期出现的新型犯罪形式,其基本特点是犯罪主体多为农村和城市中受到不公正对待的边缘人,犯罪成本极低但危害后果极大,具有强烈的恐怖性,犯罪目的在于借滥杀无辜以引起社会关注的方式表达诉求。应当有针对性地采取畅通公民意愿表达和利益诉求渠道、消除公务化暴力、降低公民维权成本和增设终身监禁刑等对策加以应对。     

论抢劫罪的手段行为不应包括故意杀人

抢劫罪的手段行为是否包括故意杀人是抢劫罪研究中的一个关键问题,理论上存在多种学说,众说纷纭.主流学说支持手段行为包括故意杀人,并列举了相关理由.最高司法机关的司法解释也对其进行了确认.但从刑法法条间的逻辑关系出发,将故意杀人行为排除出抢劫罪的手段行为才符合罪刑法定原则,才可以实现准确的定罪量刑.     

有组织毒品犯罪的特点及其打击对策

毒品犯罪活动日益严重,并加大规模逐渐向有组织犯罪转变.其犯罪手段灵活多变并呈现隐蔽化趋势,新型毒品不断更新换代,大要案增多,涉毒数量大和暴力对抗程度不断加剧.因此,应围绕加强国际间的禁毒合作,严抓边境查控,健全执法机制,加强全民防毒禁毒意识和加强对吸毒人员的管理和控制,探索研究当前有组织毒品犯罪的打击对策.     

略论我国刑事案件的证明责任

在我国刑事诉讼中,通常认为公诉案件由控方举证,自诉案件由自诉人举证。针对刑事案件中出现的与证明责任问题有关的情况笔者提出以下观点：刑事案件证明责任的分配划分为定罪情节和量刑情节两个方面,定罪情节和量刑情节的证明责任分配通常遵循＂谁主张、谁举证＂原则,但是不同的量刑情节要有不同的证明责任分配规则。