[刑法] 關於虐童王昊一案請問大家怎麼看? - 考試
By Hedda
at 2013-07-25T01:38
at 2013-07-25T01:38
Table of Contents
今天看到最高法院的確定判決,其中有兩點認定我自己覺得怪怪的,想提出來與大家分享一下,順便應用一下所學的刑法
1.最高法院認定孩童王昊是傷害致死,不知道是否就是課本所提到的因傷致死?如果是的話,那這樣的認定不是很奇怪嗎??畢竟王昊並不是因為被虐待致死的,他是因注射毒品才死亡,這樣為什麼可以認定傷害致死?
2.最高法院因認定加害人不懂餵食多種毒品會致死,且有將被害人送醫,因此認定為過失殺人。關於故意或過失,這方面的認定為構成要件的主觀要素,且這部分應為客觀審主觀,既然客觀大家都知道餵食毒品不論有無過量,是否混合都可能會致死,那為何最高法院會以類似主觀審主觀的方式認定加害人為過失而非故意??
--
1.最高法院認定孩童王昊是傷害致死,不知道是否就是課本所提到的因傷致死?如果是的話,那這樣的認定不是很奇怪嗎??畢竟王昊並不是因為被虐待致死的,他是因注射毒品才死亡,這樣為什麼可以認定傷害致死?
2.最高法院因認定加害人不懂餵食多種毒品會致死,且有將被害人送醫,因此認定為過失殺人。關於故意或過失,這方面的認定為構成要件的主觀要素,且這部分應為客觀審主觀,既然客觀大家都知道餵食毒品不論有無過量,是否混合都可能會致死,那為何最高法院會以類似主觀審主觀的方式認定加害人為過失而非故意??
--
Tags:
考試
All Comments
By Joe
at 2013-07-25T05:26
at 2013-07-25T05:26
By Ida
at 2013-07-27T07:12
at 2013-07-27T07:12
By Rosalind
at 2013-07-28T12:45
at 2013-07-28T12:45
By Hardy
at 2013-07-29T11:07
at 2013-07-29T11:07
By Kelly
at 2013-08-03T06:30
at 2013-08-03T06:30
By Zenobia
at 2013-08-05T09:13
at 2013-08-05T09:13
By Eartha
at 2013-08-09T19:46
at 2013-08-09T19:46
By Genevieve
at 2013-08-10T01:35
at 2013-08-10T01:35
By Cara
at 2013-08-10T17:03
at 2013-08-10T17:03
By Oscar
at 2013-08-14T00:12
at 2013-08-14T00:12
By Audriana
at 2013-08-14T02:12
at 2013-08-14T02:12
By Wallis
at 2013-08-15T01:03
at 2013-08-15T01:03
By Oscar
at 2013-08-15T22:16
at 2013-08-15T22:16
By Gilbert
at 2013-08-20T17:23
at 2013-08-20T17:23
By Lucy
at 2013-08-24T19:26
at 2013-08-24T19:26
By Andrew
at 2013-08-27T14:13
at 2013-08-27T14:13
By Sandy
at 2013-08-27T16:02
at 2013-08-27T16:02
By Agnes
at 2013-08-29T13:17
at 2013-08-29T13:17
By Oliver
at 2013-08-31T22:33
at 2013-08-31T22:33
Related Posts
該不該繼續念下去
By Odelette
at 2013-07-25T00:59
at 2013-07-25T00:59
升大三外文系想考一般行政
By Isabella
at 2013-07-25T00:49
at 2013-07-25T00:49
該不該繼續念下去
By Lauren
at 2013-07-25T00:09
at 2013-07-25T00:09
郝強總複習班講義 P.15 資產重估增值
By Charlotte
at 2013-07-24T22:38
at 2013-07-24T22:38
中油僱員航空加油類
By Hardy
at 2013-07-24T22:12
at 2013-07-24T22:12