Completed and unfinished assassination attempt, their differences
A completed attempt (not to be confused with a completed crime) is a situation where the perpetrator has done everything necessary and sufficient, in his opinion, to achieve a criminal result, to complete the crime. But this result did not occur due to circumstances beyond his control. For example, the killer took careful aim and fired a shot at the victim. He did everything necessary to take a person's life. But he didn’t quite take into account the laws of ballistics, or his hand trembled, or the victim managed to deflect. As a result, an injury was caused, but not fatal, or a mistake was made altogether. But in all cases there was a complete assassination attempt.
An unfinished attempt is a situation where the perpetrator failed to perform all those actions that are necessary and sufficient, in his opinion, to complete the crime. Thus, a thief tried to open the locks of a storage facility in order to steal valuable property, but was unable to do this, since the prepared tools turned out to be unsuitable for breaking such locks. A situation where a person aimed at the victim, but the weapon was knocked out by a passerby or it misfired, will be assessed as an unfinished attempted murder.
A completed attempt is distinguished from an unfinished one, mainly according to subjective criteria, i.e. depends on the assessment of the degree of completion of criminal actions by the subject himself.
The so-called “unfit” attempt, its types and criminal legal consequences.
In the theory of criminal law, an unsuitable attempt is divided into two types: an attempt on an unsuitable object (subject) and an attempt with unsuitable means . An attempt on an unfit object will occur when a person, due to an error, commits actions that objectively cannot cause damage to the object of the crime. This type of attempted crime is very rare. Examples of such an attempt could be shooting through a window at a lying person who was already dead; shot at a doll; theft of a counterfeit stone mistaken for a precious one.
An attempt with unsuitable means is the use by the perpetrator of means or instruments that, due to their objective properties, cannot cause the desired harm or lead to the intended goal. Thus, a person gives the victim a harmless powder, which is mistaken for poison; tries to fire a shot from a pistol whose firing pin has been sawed off.
An unworthy attempt entails criminal liability on a general basis in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
A completed attempt (not to be confused with a completed crime) is a situation where the perpetrator has done everything necessary and sufficient, in his opinion, to achieve a criminal result, to complete the crime. But this result did not occur due to circumstances beyond his control. For example, the killer took careful aim and fired a shot at the victim. He did everything necessary to take a person's life. But he didn’t quite take into account the laws of ballistics, or his hand trembled, or the victim managed to deflect. As a result, an injury was caused, but not fatal, or a mistake was made altogether. But in all cases there was a complete assassination attempt.
An unfinished attempt is a situation where the perpetrator failed to perform all those actions that are necessary and sufficient, in his opinion, to complete the crime. Thus, a thief tried to open the locks of a storage facility in order to steal valuable property, but was unable to do this, since the prepared tools turned out to be unsuitable for breaking such locks. A situation where a person aimed at the victim, but the weapon was knocked out by a passerby or it misfired, will be assessed as an unfinished attempted murder.
A completed attempt is distinguished from an unfinished one, mainly according to subjective criteria, i.e. depends on the assessment of the degree of completion of criminal actions by the subject himself.
The so-called “unfit” attempt, its types and criminal legal consequences.
In the theory of criminal law, an unsuitable attempt is divided into two types: an attempt on an unsuitable object (subject) and an attempt with unsuitable means . An attempt on an unfit object will occur when a person, due to an error, commits actions that objectively cannot cause damage to the object of the crime. This type of attempted crime is very rare. Examples of such an attempt could be shooting through a window at a lying person who was already dead; shot at a doll; theft of a counterfeit stone mistaken for a precious one.
An attempt with unsuitable means is the use by the perpetrator of means or instruments that, due to their objective properties, cannot cause the desired harm or lead to the intended goal. Thus, a person gives the victim a harmless powder, which is mistaken for poison; tries to fire a shot from a pistol whose firing pin has been sawed off.
An unworthy attempt entails criminal liability on a general basis in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Judicial practice: Attempted crime
Let us analyze an example from judicial practice, namely, the Decision of the Magistrate of the judicial district No. 11 of the Kirovsky judicial district of Samara in case 1-15/2018 dated March 15, 2022 [11]. Brief essence of the plot of the case: <DATE27> at approximately 11 hours 10 minutes, Zhukova A.N., being in the store “<OBEZLIChENO>”, located in the Kirovsky district of Samara, at the address: <ADDRESS> saw displayed on sale of goods, namely: GILL FUSION shaving cassettes worth 1063 rubles 46 kopecks excluding VAT for 1 package and GILL Mach-3 shaving cassettes costing 462 rubles 50 kopecks excluding VAT for 1 package, owned by <IMPERSONAL>”. At the same time, at Zhukova A.N. there was an intent to secretly steal someone else’s property belonging to <IMPERSONAL>”.
In order to implement her criminal intent aimed at illegally seizing someone else's property, Zhukova A.N., guided by selfish motives, secretly, taking advantage of the absence of sellers and other strangers, making sure that no one was watching her actions, took one by one from the shelves in her hands the above goods, namely: GILL FUSION shaving cassettes in the amount of 4 packages, costing 1063 rubles 46 kopecks excluding VAT for 1 package, total cost 4253 rubles 84 kopecks and GILL Mach-3 shaving cassette costing 462 rubles 50 kopecks excluding VAT for 1 package, and a total of 4716 rubles 34 kopecks and put it in a bag with her.
Not wanting to stop her criminal actions, Zhukova A.N. Having illegally taken possession of the stolen property and keeping it with her, she tried to escape from the scene of the crime. However, Zhukova A.N. she was unable to complete her criminal intent aimed at secretly stealing someone else’s property due to circumstances beyond her control, as she was detained by employees of the Carousel store. In case of completion of his criminal intent aimed at secretly stealing someone else's property, Zhukova A.N. would have caused "UNPERSONAL" material damage in the total amount of 4,716 rubles 34 kopecks, excluding VAT.
Zhukova A.N. admitted guilt and repented of what she had done, confessed, has a dependent young disabled child <FULL NAME2> D., <DATE4> of birth, takes care of an elderly grandmother, has chronic diseases, including: HIV, hepatitis C, pyelonephritis, the court, in accordance with clauses “i”, “d”, part 1, part 2 of article 61 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, recognizes these circumstances as circumstances mitigating the punishment.
In accordance with paragraph “a” of Part 1 of Article 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the court recognizes as an aggravating circumstance the relapse of crimes provided for in Part 1 of Article 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (sentence from <DATE7> Oktyabrsky District Court of Samara).
Thus, analyzing the court’s decision, we can conclude that all the signs of an attempted crime are present, namely the presence of direct intent to secretly steal someone else’s property; the presence of actions directly aimed at committing a crime, in essence; incompleteness of criminal intent aimed at secretly stealing someone else's property.
In judicial practice, there is a fairly large number of criminal cases related to attempted crime and terminated due to the use of the parties. As judicial practice shows, such cases mainly include cases where crimes of minor gravity were committed. Let's consider one of these cases, namely the Decision of the Magistrate of Court District No. 215 of the Tikhoretsky District of the Krasnodar Territory in case 1-6/2018 dated March 13, 2022. The crime is committed under the following circumstances:
<DATE6> during the period of time from <IMPERSONAL>, a more exact time has not been established by inquiry, <FULL NAME3> being on agricultural land having a cadastral number <NUMBER> and located at the address: <ADDRESS>, where corn grows variety "Futurix", which is in the stage of full ripening, with the intent to secretly steal someone else's property, namely, corn cobs belonging to <IMPERSONAL>, making sure that there is no one nearby, no one sees him and no one is watching him, secretly from others , realizing the social danger of his actions, foreseeing the inevitability of socially dangerous consequences in the form of causing property damage to the victim and wishing for their occurrence, plucked 1,220 pieces of corn cobs, weighing 373.7 kg, from the growing stalks of corn, belonging to "OBEZLIChENNO" worth 2,690 rubles 64 kopecks . However, the defendant was unable to carry out his criminal intent and dispose of the stolen property at his own discretion due to circumstances beyond his control, as he was stopped by the employees of <IMPERSONAL>
He also committed attempted theft, that is, the secret theft of someone else’s property, if the crime was not completed due to circumstances beyond the control of this person.
So, <DATE7> during the period of time from <IMPERSONAL>, a more exact time has not been established by the inquiry, Avakyan G.D. being on agricultural land, having a cadastral number <NUMBER> and located at the address: <ADDRESS>, where the sunflower variety "SPK Gin" grows, which is in the full ripening stage, with the intent to secretly steal someone else's property, namely sunflower seeds belonging to <IMPERSONAL>, making sure that there is no one nearby, no one sees him and no one is watching him, secretly from others, realizing the social danger of his actions, foreseeing the inevitability of socially dangerous consequences in the form of causing property damage to the victim and desiring their occurrence , using a knife, cut off sunflower baskets from sunflower stems belonging to <OBEZLICHENNO>, some of which he put into seven polymer bags, however, he was unable to complete his criminal intent due to circumstances beyond his control, since he was stopped by employees of <OBEZLICHENNO > The weight of the sunflower seeds that the defendant tried to steal was 48.3 kg, costing 3,139 rubles 50 kopecks.
The court came to the conclusion that the defendant G.D. Avakyan committed a crime of minor gravity, has not been convicted, at the place of residence the defendant is characterized as "UNPERSONAL", "UNPERSONAL", agrees to the termination of the criminal case in connection with reconciliation, and the court finds it possible to terminate the criminal case against him on the basis of Article 25 of the Criminal Procedure Code Code of the Russian Federation and Article 76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, that is, in connection with reconciliation with the victim.
Thus, we can state the fact that the legislator has provided for the possibility of terminating criminal cases of minor and medium gravity in the event of reconciliation between the defendant and the victim, while the resolution of this issue is made dependent on the will of the victim, subject to the conditions set out in the law.
In the process of studying criminal cases, it was established that in the vast majority of cases, the investigation of an unfinished crime was carried out together with the investigation of other unfinished or completed criminal acts within the framework of one proceeding. In addition, often in the materials of the same criminal case, two or more subjects appeared as alleged subjects of illegal activities, who often acted as defendants, suspects and accused not only of an unfinished crime, but often also of completed illegal acts.
In general, it can be stated that in more than half of the studied criminal cases of illegal activities related to unfinished crimes, more than one subject of illegal behavior appears. Somewhat less frequently, but also in the totality of criminal case materials studied, cases are described when in an illegal activity associated with at least one unfinished crime, only one attacker acted as a suspect, accused or defendant.
Another feature of unfinished crimes is that they are often carried out by their subjects not only in the form of simple complicity (that is, when two or more people participate in an unfinished crime, acting as perpetrators or co-perpetrators in relation to each other and their roles in crime). Often, criminals also commit them in a complex form of complicity, when not only the perpetrators, but also the organizers and (or) instigators and (or) accomplices participate in the crime.
Often, organizers, instigators or accomplices of unfinished crimes (i.e. persons involved in a complex form of complicity) appear in the case materials as the only suspects, accused and (or) defendants, in the absence of suspected (accused, defendants) perpetrators, which is a rarity for many other categories of crimes, where these persons are most often brought to criminal responsibility together with the direct perpetrators of the crimes.
Thus, among other problems existing in the area under study, one can also point out some imperfections in the modern legislative framework, in particular, its individual norms regulating issues related to the qualification of a particular type of unfinished crime, as well as possible forms of complicity of those who committed it subjects.
In the process of studying criminal cases, it turned out that in the vast majority of cases, attempted crimes are identified and investigated, and much more rarely - preparations for such. This is due to the fact that in the process of preparing for a crime, the attacker leaves significantly fewer traces of his illegal behavior than when attempting to commit a particular illegal act.
Indeed, an attempted crime also covers and absorbs the preparation stage, but is not limited to it. Thus, cases are most often classified as attempts when the attacker has already begun to commit the crime itself, provided for by one or another norm of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, and, as a rule, he has already completed the preparation for the crime by this moment.
In addition, it is often much more difficult to prove preparation for a crime than an attempted crime, since most likely the attacker will try in every possible way to justify and argue that he does not have any criminal intent and purpose when committing certain actions similar to signs of preparation for a crime. crime.
It has been established that the vast majority of cases considered involve crimes of minor and medium gravity, but not serious and especially serious crimes. Attempted crimes of minor and medium gravity make up the highest proportion among the total number of unfinished latent (i.e., not detected and not investigated) illegal attacks. In addition to other trends, we were also able to identify the most typical groups of unfinished illegal attacks, including: crimes against life and health; property crimes; crimes against sexual integrity and sexual freedom of the individual.
