To explore the effect of intervention on the causality in criminal law
Jiangsu courtYuan Wei2013-09-26 

Causality in criminal law is a law caused by the harmful behavior and results of the link. Because our country implements the principle of culpability, one of the harmful behavior own harm results bear criminal responsibility, therefore, whether there is a causal relationship between identified a harmful result and a harmful act, is to determine whether the actor objective evidence to bear criminal responsibility for the results. Causality in criminal law is a difficult and key problem of Chinese and foreign criminal law theory and judicial practice circles vexed. In view of the limited level and the causal relationship between the complexity, this paper does not do in-depth research on the causal relationship, analyze the influence only on the causal relationship between the intervention factors.
　　A limitation, causal relationship 
China's criminal law theory previously taken is inevitable causality, i.e. when the damage behavior contains harmful consequences arising under, and in accordance with the laws of the harm result, between harm behavior and harm result is necessary causality; only the causal relationship, is the causation in criminal law. This doctrine, causality has the following characteristics: 1, as some reason behavior must have the possibility of occurrence of harmful consequences really, it is necessary to have a causal relationship between the behavior and harm result; the so-called a behavior has possibility harmful consequences really, refers to the behavior in the objective according to harm results occur, if the behavior does not have the harm of objective according to the result, the reason it is not a result, only the conditions. 2, with the real possibility of also can't explain the causal relation, only when a certain phenomenon has happened is the result of the possibility is consistent with the laws of cause a result, the causal relationship between the to determine a phenomenon and the results. If a phenomenon although there is possibility of the reality, but in the development process, occasionally with another causal chains linked together, so that by another phenomenon is consistent with the laws of the results, then, a causal relationship is not between phenomenon and the consequence. 3, the causal relationship is causal relationship under certain conditions. Therefore, whether a causal relationship between the behavior and some results, can not be divorced from the specific conditions of the performance of the behavior of the.
In our country for a long period of time, influenced by the Soviet Union Law, that the behavior person should take the criminal responsibility must be a causal relationship exists between recognition and results. As a bright B have heart disease, deliberately insulted B lead to death the disease. From the medical point of view, heart disease is the main and direct reasons B death, between the two is the causal relation. But just fortuitous causal relationship between a and B, reality will lose the foundation of responsibility for a crime, indulge. The causal relationship between cause and effect on the philosophy of epistemology and the law on mixed together, so as to put too high requirements on crime crime investigation, most of the time and social identity values often contradictory, in theory and practice have lost that status.
　　The difference between the two, intervening factors and accidental causality said 
Due to the inevitable causal relationship theory leads to establishment of the scope of causality is too narrow, and later appeared in accidental causation, the accidental causality is a concept corresponding to the causal relation. The causal relation theory, is highly from the philosophy to understand, said the results is the main act caused a objective law performance. For example, a knifed B behavior caused b serious results, the relationship between the behavior and result is the causal relation. At least, I have not heard of knife to people who have not injured. But the accidental causality relationship between the opposite, by reporting to the behavior and the result by cannot occur in normally, just because the external objective, subjective reasons caused the intervention. For example, a walking, B while it unprepared, put a bag away, a chasing B crossing process, is C by driving a vehicle knocked down and killed on the spot, on the causal relationship between the accidental death of ethylene action and a.
The factors involved in the crime is refers to between the intervention of human behavior and the results, and can be appraised by the criminal law of the external objective and subjective factors. Including third intentional negligence, intentional and negligent victims and other main legal behavior. For example, a B repeatedly slashed, induced B seriously, after a stand B request to send B go to hospital for treatment, the way encountered C, C speeding, accident, B died on the spot, a and B are death no causality, C acts constitute intervening factors cited cases, the driver the accident caused by intervention in a cut people behavior B between the death, and prevents a behavior of ethylene deaths occurred in force, the causal relationship between it and cut a hurtful behavior and B death results. Therefore, a to B's death is not to bear criminal responsibility. From this we can see that, the factors involved in the stress is between the behavior and harm result suspects in the chain of causation in the other factors, not only includes the situation, including the two party can not coexist situation. But the accidental causality emphasizes basic behavior and the outside factors combined. Thus the two despite the existence of a cross, but not the same concept.
　　Three, the characteristics and types of intervention factors 
The factors involved in the criminal law must have the following characteristics: first, intervening factors appear time must be in the previous second harm behavior, intervention factors directly cause harm results, and harm for the link between direct and inevitable result, leading behavior and harmful for the link between indirect and accidental contact; third, intervention risk factors and previous behavior must be independent relationship, two are not a common criminal intention and meaning contact, otherwise it may be.
In the factors involved in the case of criminal law causality, antecedent harm behavior does not lead directly to the final result, but by the intervening factors caused harm result, antecedent actions by intervening factors indirectly. Therefore, the relationship between the advanced behavior and harm result is not necessarily or direct causal relationship, but the accidental contact. The author combines case analysis of several common intervention factors.
(a) natural events or other force majeure
The so-called natural events or other force majeure factors, relative to the non human factors or forces and naturally occurring. Irresistible force usually includes two kinds of situations: is a kind of natural causes, such as floods, droughts, snowstorms, earthquakes and other ; another is the social causes, such as war, strike, the government. Between natural events or other irresistible tend to interrupt to harm behavior and harm results causal link. Such as Zhang to the killing of his girlfriend, he set out to destroy the automobile braking device, if his girlfriend drive, 15 minutes after the case of a steep slope, will fall off a cliff and died. But his girlfriend will auto opened 5 minutes later, in case of flash floods, mudslides rushed down the mountain from the. In this case, intervening factors of debris flow occurrence is the direct cause of death of the woman, and between the act of killing and debris flow Zhang occur without any cause and be caused, influence and be affected by the role, role and relationship between, thus killing behavior and Zhang the female death is no causal relationship of the criminal law.
(two) factors of the victim
Factors the victim side become the factors involved in the case is the most common, in the judicial practice mainly includes: (1) the special victim. This is one of the most common of all the intervening factors, worthy of our in-depth study and research, so as to provide a general reference significance of guidance for judicial practice. Such as Lee for trifles and Lin dispute, to Lin's chest like a thrust, cause Lin heart attack, after the rescue invalid and death. Classics appraisal, causes of trauma, Lin heart attack. In this case, there is a causal relationship between a sense of Li Lin chest and forest a result of death, because there is no Li thrust Lin chest behavior, the victim Lin will not have the injury, heart disease will not attack. In the special constitution as the factors involved in the case, the identification of causal relationship has a certain complexity, when necessary, by means of comprehensive accreditation of forensic and criminal science and technology correspondent. (2) self victim. For example, Tangmou very unwilling to kill Liu, the Liu Huangbuzelu, fell into the water. At this time, Liu's free will, the freedom of action by Tangmou after behavior control, the lack of freedom of choice behavior is necessary, has the causal relationship between criminal sense between Tang one of Liu behaviors of a hunting and Liu drowning death results. (3) the Dutch act victim. In personal injury cases, the victim may Dutch act the way to the end of his life, the causality in this situation has very big dispute. The author thinks, when the victim in the harm behavior encountered the perpetrators of the victim, if there are other options but fragile to choose Dutch act, between the perpetrator and the death of the victim is no causal relationship between the results of the meaning of the criminal law; harm if the perpetrator the victim behavior has made the victim in the spirit physical and unbearable, lost the true meaning of the right to choose, in this case the existence of causal with the sense of science of criminal law should be between the results, the harm behavior and that the death of the victim of unlawful offender.
(three) the third party's behavior
The involvement of third human behavior includes two kinds of situations: (1) intentionally third. This case will be divided into two kinds of situations, the first scenario is if the back of intervening factors while producing the results also play a role for certain, but does not deny the antecedent harm behavior decision function, there are still a causal relationship between should be identified first harm behavior and harm result finally. Second cases are leading behavior people merely provides the premise for the outcome, the advance behavior itself is not enough to force alone causes harmful consequences, but the involvement of third people deliberately behavior, causes the formation and behavior of force, led to the occurrence of the harmful consequences, then third people's intentional behavior the decisive factor is mainly the harm, should be a causal relationship between the antecedent actions and ultimately denied the harm result. ( 2) the general negligence third. The causal relationship between this usually doesn't interrupt the advance behavior and the harm result. For example, the oil tanker spill some oil in the public streets, third people intentionally tossed a cigarette, cause fire, still exist causal relationship between the sense of leading behavior and fire results.
　　Identification of causal factors, involved four cases 
The factors involved in the event, there may be two kinds of state: is an intervening factors not causal influence results of previous harm behavior and harm the relationship between ultimate harm results, including increasing part still harm behavior by previous criminal responsibility; is a effective intervention factors between interrupt previous harm harmful behavior and the final result of causality, thus making previously harm behavior only on the initial results of responsibility, and aggravated harm result by intervening factors to bear. Then a state with the West instead of consistent theory.
In the process of development of causality, if in the event of force majeure natural or not, the victim side factors or third party's behavior principle ", why not the reason", but also whether there is a causal relationship between the factors of the following four aspects to determine first along with results.
First, the probability of. That is to fully consider the advance behavior human behavior result in harmful consequences the size of the possibility and probability level. With high probability, a causal relationship exists between; low probability , causality is not.
Second, unpredictable. Considering from the angle of the person's behavior, to judge the intervening factors are able to foresee is behavior person, namely the intervening factors are predictable. Only when the intervening factors can not be expected, unforeseeable, can interrupt the causal relationship between the original.
In third, abnormal. Refers to considering the effect of intervening factors of causality, is abnormal or normal to see interventional factor of itself. If the intervening factors is abnormal, the causal relationship between behavior and harmful results previously involved factors are cut off, thereby having no causality in criminal law sense, it still has a causal relationship.
Fourth, independence. Refers to considering the effect of intervening factors on the causal relationship between, to see the intervention factors with the previous behavior is independent or subordinate relationship. If the intervening factors independent of the previous act, causality between behavior and harmful results previously involved factors are cut off, thereby having no causality in criminal law, it still has a causal relationship.
To sum up, in the factors involved in the case, should be through the investigation of the behavior leads to the results of probability, behavior person happened to occur the factors involved in the foreseeable size, interventional abnormal size and intervention on the size of the result, at the same time to the judicial identification of criminal science and technology means, whether there is a causal relationship between the front behavior and results of comprehensive judgment.