Historical Criminal Cases

For people who are interested in historical criminal cases, try to get a hold of a copy of Song Ci's "Collected Cases of Injustice Rectified":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collected_Cases_of_Injustice_Rectified

Song Ci (1186 - 1249), a forensic medical expert in the Song Dynasty wrote a book titled Xi Yuan Ji Lu (Collected Cases of Injustice Rectified through Forensic Science). In the book, Song Ci said:

“A forensic medical doctor must be serious, conscientious, and highly responsible, and must also personally examine each dead body or that of a wounded person. The particulars of each case must be recorded in the doctor’s own handwriting. No one else is allow to write his autopsy report. A coroner must not avoid performing an autopsy because he detests the stench of corpses. A coroner must refrain from sitting comfortably behind a curtain of incense that mask the stench, let his subordinates do the autopsy unsupervised, or allow a petty official to write his autopsy report, leaving all the inaccuracies unchecked and uncorrected.”

He also said:

“Should there be any inaccuracy in an autopsy report, injustice would remain with the deceased as well as the living. A wrongful death sentence without justice may claim one or more additional lives, which would in turn result in feuds and revenges, prolonging the tragedy. In order to avoid any miscarriage of justice, the coroner must immediately examine the case personally.”

In summary, Song Ci maintained that a coroner must always personally perform each autopsy himself. Song Ci served as a presiding judge in the Chinese high courts for many terms. During his post at a criminal court in Hunan Province, Song Ci would personally examine the crime scene each time he encountered a difficult case of homicide or physical assault. Song Ci combined many historical cases of forensic science with his own experiences and wrote the book Xi Yuan Ji Lu with an eye to avoiding miscarriages of justice. The book was esteemed by generations of forensic scientists. Eventually it was translated into English, German, Japanese, French and other languages.

Song Ci’s serious attitude toward autopsy had a tremendous influence on later generations. A judge in the Qing Dynasty, under Song Ci’s influence, insisted on examining the crime scene, and successfully solved a very difficult case of murder. Here is a summary of the story:

A man was murdered with “dozens of slash wounds from a sickle.” The case could not be solved due to lack of evidence. The certain judge who performed the autopsy personally visited the crime scene and learnt that the victim had argued with a person about a loan that he was trying to collect from that person. He secretly investigated the whereabouts of the suspect. When he had obtained sufficient evidence, he suddenly confiscated all sickles in that area, and made it clear to all that failing to comply with the order [to hand over all sickles] will result in a charge of obstruction of justice upon the owner of the sickle. All the sickles were handed in. There were seventy or eighty sickles. “It was the middle of a summer. One of the submitted sickles attracted many flies. The prosecutor asked for the owner of that sickle. One person claimed to be the owner, and he was the man who refused to repay the overdue loan. He was detained for interrogation but he refused to admit to the crime. The judge told him to look at his sickle. None of the other sickles were able to attract any flies while his sickle attracted all the flies. The judge told him that it was because that sickle still had the scent blood on it and the flies were lured by the scent of blood. “How can you deny Xi Yuan Ji Lu, “Collected Cases of Injustice Rectified Through Forensic Science II.”)

The moral of the story is that autopsies and investigations must be conducted conscientiously and meticulously. Only with irrefutable evidence will there be justice for the false will be accused. Only with concrete evidence will the murderers admit their crimes.
 
Very interesting article, Uiler! :goodjob:

However I have here another case. This case however just happened and I am in no way sure if it is finally over as the BGH gave it back to the Landgericht for further examination, but it should so, since it is from 2003.

BGHSt 48, 207:

The defendent dealt with illegal copies of CDs. M, the latter victim, got knowledge about that. He went to the Defendent and threatened him to go to the police and to trounce him in presence of his friends, if he wouldn't pay 6.000,- DM (~ 3.000,- Euro).
One evening he visited the defendent's appartment with Ma. The defendent let them come into the flat, where M. was demanding further 5.000,- DM. The defendent rejected that. So M. was threatening to destroy his furnitures. The defendent was now ready to give 1.200,- DM, from which he said that was all he had. But M. rejected that and again threatened with the police, tax advisers and the theft of things worth that money. To underline that he started to kick against some CDs. The defendent then said, he should stop. He would get the money. He fetched a bag with 5.000,- DM and 500,- US- $. It is not clear if the defendent gave it to Ma. or if Ma. grabbed it.
However the defendent went behind M., who was standing with the hands in the trouser bags. He was angry that M. got his money and was threatening his existence. So suddenly he took M.'s head, beat him and cut several times through his neck with a kitchen knife until the spine was reached. M. collapsed and at once died.

The Landgericht Fürth/ Nürnberg sentenced him to life imprisonment because of murder, § 211 II StGB. The BGH did not follow that but gave it back as there are indeed errors in that sentence.
At first the defendent must have acted treacherous, as the quarrel between both was over. But that's not the case. M. was still the agressor. The attack was not yet over as M. had still the money. The attack was terminated indeed but since he had the money and was still in the flat the attack was not accomplished.
In German law a deed is finally accomplished, if the success is secured. So if you steal a thing, it is fulfilled to take the money but accomplished not before reaching safe area. In that time others can help and so become guilty therefore.
Here it is the same situation: M. was still in the flat and so the agression was still going on. So he could still act in self defence. Also as M. was the aggressor he still had to expect a defence reaction by the victim. Although self defence does not exclude per se treacherous behaviour, as the BGH let this open, I can't really immagine such a case and that would be very rare. So even sudden attacks can't be treacherous as in these cases only the aggressor did underestimate the chances of such a counter strike. That has no consequences on the self defence.
The only reason why the BGH gave it back was, that it was in no way clear, why the defendent acted. If he only did that because of stopping the danger that M. might return someday, he would be guilty as he could get help from the police and a self defence was not commanded. But since it is very difficult to prove that the defendent only acted because of that, he would have been acquitted.

This case is in so far important as it can happen everywhere and everywhen. It is also important because of the distinction between treacherous behaviour and self defence. It is indeed also a very important case for students as this is a perfect case for works.
And it is a good small case for entertainment. Although I think M. would not be very happy about that...

Adler
 
Okay, this thread should be originally only destinated for criminal cases. But sometimes other cases are also interesting. Like this one. To understand it, you have to know that the German language has for most designations both male and female names. A lawyer is for instance Anwalt or Anwältin (female). Some languages like the English one does not have such a distiction. However in Germany many so called feminists do want both names to be mentioned. That this leads to sometime horrendous namings in some laws is another question.

Verwaltungsgericht Hannover, Az. 6 A 1529/98, 22.03.2000 (not published)

One feminitical interested person made her dissertation (doctor) as veterinarian. Her note was a magna cum laude, the best note to give. In Germany the title of a doctor is given still in a Latin document. There only the male title of doctor is used, also for female doctors. So she asked the university to alter this in "Doctora medicinae veterinariae". But the university said, that this is not possible as it is in no way a valid title, as in the Latin language the female form of doctor is doctrix. As she did not want to use that name as it hears too familiar with Asterix (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix) and being unworthy for a title. So she sued the state Niedersachsen to give her the title, as the this would be acceptable as new form. The Vatican still uses Latin and even introduces new words in that language.
The court, although accepting that the Latin language is still able to change itself, does not see the ability to alter the Latin language as no German organs are having the right nor the duty doing so. She might think that the latin form doctrix is unworthy, but that does not change, that it is the only adequate female title. And although the ending -a in Latin is normally female there are several exceptions, like agricola (farmer).
Thus she lost the case. She also did not appeal against it.

An example that some cases are more a comedy. I mean for any objective third.

Adler
 
And yes I am studying law in Hamburg. My first exam is planned at the beginning of 2006, so I will be away for two month until my written exams are over (one homework (4 weeks) and then three tests).

Adler
And what law are you studying? criminal law?
 
Here in Germany we are studying law without being specialized to a certain area. Indeed you have to take all three main subjetcs, criminal ,administrative and private law in the exams. Also you have to choose a certain area from these subjects as special area. So International Private Law or Law of the Seas or Criminology.

Adler
 
Here in Germany we are studying law without being specialized to a certain area. Indeed you have to take all three main subjetcs, criminal ,administrative and private law in the exams. Also you have to choose a certain area from these subjects as special area. So International Private Law or Law of the Seas or Criminology.

Adler
The same system is in Russia. But we have to study also International Law as main subject.
PS I'm glad to communicate with German lawyer. Your private law is the best over the world :goodjob:
 
Thanks, Commy. Do you also study law? I am now ready with my first exam, waiting for the Referendariat, a practical training. Since this can last a year or more, I am writing my dissertation in International Law. What about you?

Adler
 
Yes, I'm also studuing law. I have a practical training in arbitration court (court of common jurisdicdion in economic sphere). And now I'm writing my graduate work in Private Law ("Non-material goods in Russian Private Law"). And what is theme of your dissertation?
 
My topic is a comparisation between the remedies in the German law, the CISG, the PICC (UNIDROIT principles), the PECL (European principles) and perhaps the EU law.
Good Luck with your work.

Adler
 
First case was clearly not aberratio ictus. Slovenian criminal law is similar to German and I think we had this case on our Material (Substantive) Criminal Law. It is very clear case though.

More interesting case, also from Germany I think, was, when a man shot another man with intention to kill him, not knowing man was already death. If alive, wound would be mortal.

Direct intent, but no mortal consequences. How would you solve the case?
 
My topic is a comparisation between the remedies in the German law, the CISG, the PICC (UNIDROIT principles), the PECL (European principles) and perhaps the EU law.
Adler
Sounds interesting :)
Good Luck with your work.
The same to you
2 Kosez: attemption to killing?
 
Double post
 
It is indeed an attempt to killing or murdering (depending on the circumstances). Obviously he did not succeed in his deed as the man was already dead. He wanted to kill and even shot at him and as it is obvious that the dead could not attack him, there are no signs he could acted in self defence or other things causing an excusion or even justification (also given that he was not forced to shoot on the man by a third). So he is guilty. Also he could not retreat from the attempt (in German law you can retreat from an attempt if you have autonomous motives and if the deed is not finished) as the attempt is finished because he had fired on the dead and hit him "mortally".
The first case (Rose- Rosahl) lead to a debate, if it was an aberratio ictus or an error in persona for a long time. It was not until about 1990 when the BGH continued the jurisdiction of the Obertribunal when it was decided again. Until then, and even today, there was still a discussion. And as student you have to see and discuss that, too.

Adler
 
Some very interesting cases here! I am not studying law, but reading about criminal cases interests me. It's been a long time since I've read some cases until this thread, but this site http://www.crimelibrary.com/ had me captivated for a few weeks reading all the stories.
 
Back
Top Bottom