In the new edition Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was excluded from the killing. Meanwhile, this circumstance did not affect the situation of this crime among all attacks on life. Currently, the punishment for this act is established in Art. 109.
Inadvertent death
For this crime established:
- Correctional or forced labor.
- Imprisonment.
The duration of sentences under Art. 109 h. 1 - up to 2 years.
Part two
It covers attacks on the life of the victim as a result of the improper fulfillment by the subject of his professional duties. For this crime under Art. 109 guilty faces:
- Restriction of freedom.
- Forced work.
- Imprisonment.
The duration of sentences is up to 3 years. In addition to imprisonment and forced labor, the perpetrator may be prohibited from holding certain positions or carrying out specific activities for three years.
Qualifying composition
Part Three 109 of the Criminal Code covers attacks on the lives of two or more victims. For this crime, the perpetrator may be charged with:
- Restriction of freedom.
- Imprisonment.
- Forced work.
The duration of sentences is up to 4 years. In addition to imprisonment, the court may prohibit the offender from engaging in specific activities or staying in a certain position for 3 years.
Comment
The crime in question may be committed by frivolity. In this case, the subject foresaw the likelihood of dangerous consequences of his behavior. However, despite this, without sufficient grounds, he counted on their prevention. Causing a reckless death also occurs due to negligence. In such a situation, the perpetrator did not expect dangerous consequences, but with due attention to his actions he could and should have foreseen them. It is believed that death by frivolity is a greater danger than the death of the victim due to the negligence of the perpetrator.
Differentiation problems
As practice shows, the courts do not always distinguish between intentional homicide and causing death by negligence. Moreover, the guilty awareness of the factual circumstances of their own behavior is erroneously regarded as a prediction of the probable death of the victim. Such conclusions arise as a result of an insufficiently deep analysis of the subjective part of the act, without taking into account specific facts, the characteristics of the interaction between the offender and the victim, the whole situation and the intentions of the parties.
Qualification
The criminal acts that caused the death of the victim may fall under Art. 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation only in the case when the perpetrator had no intention of inflicting serious damage on another subject, much less killing him. Although there are quite a lot of cases when a person dies as a result of beatings, a blow to an object during a physical impact on him by a suspect. In such situations, the behavior of the perpetrator is covered by Art. 109 only when he committed the indicated actions without intent to kill the victim, and due to the circumstances of the incident he should and could have assumed dangerous consequences.
Frivolity
It must be distinguished from indirect intent. When qualifying crimes under Art. 109 it should be noted that:
- Guilty with frivolity implies only the likelihood of death in such situations. With indirect intent, he foresees the consequences in this particular case.
- With frivolity, the subject hopes that the death of a person does not occur.When committing an act with indirect intent, he does not take measures to prevent the death of the victim, does not want to, but consciously allows it or treats its offensive with indifference.
Randomness
Responsibility under Art. 109 does not occur if:
- The subject assumed the probable death of the victim, did not want it. At the same time, he took all the appropriate measures, in his opinion, to prevent it, but it came about for reasons beyond his control.
- The subject did not anticipate, could not and should not have foreseen such consequences.
In the latter situation, the combination of an objective element (should have) and a subjective component (could) during the assessment of a specific crime allows us to draw the correct conclusion about the distinction between accidental and careless death.
Improper enforcement of rules / duties
Professional tasks can be defined in the law, other normative act adopted in a particular institution, state standard, etc. In case of bringing the subject to responsibility under Art. 109 for improper performance of his duties, which resulted in the death of a person, it is necessary to establish that the perpetrator knew about them and was warned about the danger of non-compliance with the rules. If this is not determined, then the head of the institution should be punished.