Indirect perpetration The concept of indirect perpetration applies when a deliberate crime is committed through a person which is not liable under criminal law for the act (by so-called "live instrument" or "innocent agent"). Such a person may however be held liable for another offense, but not for a deliberate crime for which she had been used. In order for an activity to be regarded as an indirect perpetration, the direct perpetrator must have a "dual intent": to commit an offense and that the innocent agent be not criminally liable. The legislation provides the following examples of indirect perpetration: use of a person not criminally liable for the lack of age or insanity, a person acting under a mistake or in self-defense, extreme emergency or other circumstances precluding unlawfulness or a person which did not act or did not unlawfully culpably, or a person which did not with a special intention or and intention presumed by the law. Indirect perpetration is in many cases similar to participation in crime (accessority), especially to counseling. The difference between indirect perpetration and participation is that the former involves using a person which is not criminally liable. The similarity between indirect perpetration and participation led some authors to refuse the former concept at...
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:nusl.cz/oai:invenio.nusl.cz:312878 |
| Date | January 2011 |
| Creators | Pulec, Adam |
| Contributors | Říha, Jiří, Herczeg, Jiří |
| Source Sets | Czech ETDs |
| Language | Czech |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess |
Page generated in 0.0058 seconds