An attacker who plans, commits and hides a crime is driven by a certain motive. One of the rather rare offenses is the deprivation of a person’s life due to blood feud. For most people, the combination of words “murder motivated by blood feud” is archaic in nature and is associated with savagery and lack of civilization. Having heard about such a reason for depriving a person of life, Russians, first of all, think about people from the North Caucasus, where such customs are still common.
What is meant by murder?
According to Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, murder is the intentional infliction of violent death on a person. The reasons and motives for the deliberate deprivation of life can be very different. Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation states that the person who committed this crime must be brought to criminal liability. The accused is sentenced to imprisonment after his guilt in the actions that led to the biological death of the victim (one or more) is proven.
Note!
The crime is considered serious regardless of the identity of the victim. The moral character of the victim is not taken into account when making a court decision.
The determining role in imposing punishment is played by the reasons for committing the crime and its method. These factors are defined as mitigating or aggravating circumstances.
Princess Olga's anger
Princess Olga is not the person who should be offended. The Drevlyans who killed her husband did not suspect which Pandora's box had been opened at that moment.
The first time she ordered 20 ambassadors who had sailed to ask for her hand to be buried alive. The second time she burned another 20 people from the Drevlyan delegation. The third time she ordered to kill part of the nobility who had arrived at the funeral feast. Well, the fourth time she burned the capital of the Drevlyans, killing half of the population, and taking the second into slavery.
Article for revenge murder of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
The leading motive, according to judicial practice, is revenge. In some cases, it is the desire for revenge that pushes a person to crime. Historically, it goes back to blood feud, which is the founder of other types of retribution known in society.
Note!
The motive is enshrined in Part 1 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, applied when excluding revenge on an official and the custom of blood feud. An exception to this article is hostility based on nationalities, races and religions.
Revenge is a socially dangerous phenomenon. It is a relic of the past and often arises from everyday relationships and conflicts between people. The criminal wants to feel satisfaction when he takes revenge for wrongs done in the past. The main determining factor in revenge is resentment and malicious intent.
Revenge for the death of her husband
Jeanne de Clisson was an ordinary French girl, but the death of her husband radically changed her. The authorities accused him of treason and executed him. The girl, heartbroken, decided to take revenge and chose the path of piracy.
Having sold all her property, she bought ships and began to hunt for French ships. In the name of revenge, Clisson killed entire teams to show the full power of her anger to the king. This went on for 13 years, and the world called her the “Lioness of Brittany.”
Murder for revenge arising from personal relationships
Murders out of personal enmity are covered by Part 1 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Murders committed out of revenge against an official or according to the custom of blood feud are subject to assessment under paragraphs “b” and “l” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
A revenge crime is essentially lynching. The killer does not ask for help from law enforcement agencies to protect his own interests, but “punishes” his offender on his own. The harm and insult caused are assessed as such solely subjectively. The perpetrator may consider the act offensive and illegal, although in reality this may not be the case.
The reason may be:
- insult by word or action;
- causing harm to the health of the perpetrator, his relatives or friends;
- divorce of spouses;
- refusal to engage in sexual relations;
- non-repayment of loans;
- refusal to perform a contract;
- offensive actions or behavior of family members or neighbors;
- blackmail, etc.
The above examples suggest that revenge is formed on the basis of personal hostility. Thus, revenge takes on a personal character and ultimately becomes a material manifestation of hatred towards the victim.
Definition
For people who commit an atrocity out of a desire for revenge, this action is fair retribution for the harm caused to a relative or loved one. If the killer acted sincerely, one should not expect repentance from him. From the point of view of researchers, initially blood feud was personal, then it became tribal. A son could take revenge on his father, or a father on his son, a brother on his brother, or their children. Currently, the custom exists mostly among peoples living in the territory of North Ossetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, and Dagestan.
In order to prevent murders for these reasons, special commissions were created at one time to reconcile the warring parties, but murders for this reason still occur. As a rule, the injured party during reconciliation withdraws all claims against the perpetrator. The prosecutor's office and the court agree to a meeting if the problem is resolved by the warring parties. Law enforcement agencies will not open a criminal case if there was a fight without injuries or with minor wounds with a knife.
If the relatives of the killed or offended person do not want to refuse to use it, they are subject to liability under Article 231 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Blood feud murder
The motive according to this ancient custom does not relate to the enmity of nationalities, religions and races. External and cultural differences between the subjects of the crime also do not matter. The difference between the motive of blood feud is the absence of a personal relationship between the perpetrator and the victim of the committed act. The custom of blood feud has been formed since the times of the primitive society, when differences in nationality, race and religion did not exist.
According to the mountaineers, refusal to follow the custom is a shame and a sin. The family of the murdered must take revenge on the murderer or his family. Now the custom of blood feud still remains in certain regions, such as Dagestan, Chechnya, Kabardino-Balkaria, Ingushetia. Murder will be regarded as motivated by blood feud when the following conditions apply:
- the reason for performing the custom is an action considered offensive;
- execution of revenge corresponds to custom if families are not reconciled;
- when committing a crime, the accused was guided solely by the obligations imposed by custom;
- the subjects of the crime belong to nationalities where this custom is recognized.
Note!
The location of the crime is not important in terms of criminal law. The article for revenge murder does not take into account where exactly it was committed.
My Dagestan
The custom of blood feud has existed among the Caucasian peoples since time immemorial and has still hardly changed. The custom of blood feud, as well as the funeral rite, by the way, retained the spirit of ancient times, when the Caucasian peoples lived outside the state. Blood feud served as a state institution that regulated relationships between community residents, prevented crimes and punished criminals.
Taking revenge “blood for blood” is not an anachronism in the Caucasus. The custom goes back centuries, when Caucasians lived under a set of unwritten laws under the general name “adat”. In ancient times, the law of blood feud was fundamental among the Vainakh peoples (Chechens and Ingush), Ossetians, Kabardians, and Dagestanis. When these nationalities became part of the Russian Empire, they were forced to adapt to the rules that the state dictated to them. Unlike other Caucasian peoples, in the Chechen and Ingush societies neither the Russian Empire, nor the Soviet regime, nor repression were able to supplant the adat of blood feud. Perhaps because the annexation of these peoples to Russia was violent, and therefore the preservation of ancient customs was perceived as the preservation of a people who hoped to someday gain independence.
In the Caucasus, blood feud has no statute of limitations. It can be carried out after 50 or 100 years, even if the person responsible for the death and his close relatives have died. Therefore, among the Caucasian peoples it is believed that it is better to resolve all issues related to blood feud as quickly as possible, so that descendants can live in peace. When a bloodline dies a natural death, without waiting for either revenge or forgiveness, his closest relatives come under attack - brother, son, grandson, and if there are none, then other male relatives.
The ritual of blood feud described in adat began, naturally, with a motive. The reason for this could be murder, injury of a person, kidnapping of a girl, seizure of land, insult to a guest, honor, or home. After which the “procedure” of bloodshed began. If a person is killed in a quarrel and the culprit is known, then a trial is ordered. If it is established that the reason for the quarrel was not in favor of the killer, then a person is sent to his relatives, most often this is a village elder or a distant relative of the victim, who reports the decision to declare blood feud. Close relatives of the murdered person are usually not present. Blood feud comes into force from the moment it is declared. If the killer lives in the same village with the victim’s relatives, then, as a rule, he and his family leave for another place, often quite far away. They say about such a person: “Lurovella,” or “hiding from blood feud.”
This rule, like any other in the adat of blood feud, was deeply thought out by the ancients. Firstly, the departure of the killer’s family is dictated by security requirements, so that the killer’s relatives do not fall under the hot hand of the deceased’s angry relatives. Secondly, the reconciliation process has a greater chance of success if the bloodline and his relatives do not, as they say, come to the attention of the injured party. . There were cases when houses with belongings were sold for next to nothing, and entire families, fearing retribution for the actions of a relative, were forced to leave not only the village, city, but also the republic. Often, representatives of the guilty party, without waiting for messengers from their blood relatives, immediately send a mediator to them with a statement of their desire to begin the reconciliation process. And this is considered good form.
At first, revenge was taken only on the culprit of the crime. In those distant times, forgiving one’s bloodline was considered no less respectful than taking revenge. Only now few people forgive. History knows one precedent for ending blood feuds by a “willful decision” - such a verdict was made by the elders of the Chechen teips after the deportation of 1944, when, in the opinion of many, the very existence of the Vainakh people was under threat.
In the 19th century, under Imam Shamil, the law of blood feud was adjusted. Since then, the injured party could choose who to kill “in response.” This list, as a rule, included the killer's closest relatives and only on the paternal side. Even such schemes as killing a brother were practiced. For example, if a murder was committed by a person who was not very respected in the village, then his brother, whom everyone knew and respected, could be killed. Thus, the victims inflicted as deep a wound on the killer’s relatives as possible. Blood revenge was a duty and a matter of honor for all members of the victim’s clan. There were cases when it stopped - in case of non-reconciliation - only after the complete destruction of one of the warring teips.
Unlike criminal law, blood feud has no statute of limitations. A few years ago, revenge was canceled in Chechnya, which was announced back in 1926! The great-grandchildren of those who had been feuding for about seventy years made peace at the beginning of the 21st century through the mediation of neutral teips. In general, reconciliation can occur no earlier than a year after the crime, and all this time the killer must be in exile, hiding from vengeance.
The process of reconciliation or removal of blood feud between warring parties is as follows. After reaching an agreement in principle on reconciliation, at the appointed hour, usually on a large Maidan (often in a field outside the village), representatives of one and the other conflicting parties meet, dressed in dark clothes and always with their heads covered, and head to the outskirts of the village where the meeting is scheduled. None of them should raise their heads and look into the eyes of representatives of the injured party.
After a short ritual greeting and prayers, the ceremony itself begins. It is extremely short: the closest relative of the person killed in public must shave the head and beard of his “blood member.” After this, he is considered forgiven. It is believed that if a person did not succumb to the temptation to cut his enemy’s throat while shaving, then it means that he consciously forgave him. After this, festivities, abundant treats, and obligatory Caucasian dances may be scheduled.
In the case where a Chechen suspected of murder considers himself innocent, and the injured party does not have irrefutable evidence of his involvement in the crime, then suspicion can be removed by swearing on the Koran. An oath is also a whole ceremony, in which dozens of people participate on the part of the person taking it. It happens that they take a false oath “khera dui”. It is believed that perjury is much more terrible than the murder itself, and it often happens that the relatives of the murdered person, knowing that a real murderer is standing in front of them and swearing on the Koran, still accept his oath, believing that he punished himself and is much worse than bloodlines could have done this. Khera dui is one of the most serious sins of Islam. That is why the custom of taking an oath stipulates the need for numerous representatives of the suspect’s family to be present at such an oath. If few relatives come with the suspect, his oath will not be accepted, saying to him: “Go and bring old people who will share your oath with you.”
If the oath is accepted, and then under some circumstances it turns out that the murderer did take the oath, that he lied to everyone, that he deceived his elders, who swore with him, then the forgiveness is annulled. In this case, the killer may be abandoned by his relatives, whom he set up.
In blood feud there is such a thing as “kuig behki”, which translated means “guilty hand”. This is a very important detail of ancient adat, which, alas, is not always observed. The essence of the concept is this: only a person at whose hands someone died can be persecuted by bloodlines.
The duty of revenge also falls on the closest relatives of the murdered person. If revenge is carried out by a friend, it will not be considered blood feud, but murder, for which the avenger will receive new blood relatives. However, it also happens that a murderer is killed by his own relatives, and not by the relatives of his victim.
https://nacmen.ru/stati-svoi-sobstvenye-ili-druzei-no-ne-iz-interneta/krovnaja-mest-na-kavkaze.html
Queen Boudicca's Promise
Queen Boudicca of the Celtic tribe of the British Iceni was attacked by the Romans, who ignored the wishes of their deceased king and instead annexed her territories. Both Boudicca and her daughters were tortured, beaten, and then raped by Roman soldiers.
Promising her daughters that the Romans would pay for what they had done, Boudicca soon led a revolt in 60 AD, plundering city after city. It is believed that up to 80,000 Romans and English were killed by her army.
Emperor Nero seriously considered withdrawing all Roman troops from Britain as a result of this war, but his governor Gaius Seuthonius Polinus finally managed to defeat Boudicca and her followers.
Lynching in Islam
By the way, lynching is prohibited in Islam. Punishments are carried out only and only with the sanction of judicial authorities. The one who commits lynching is punished in accordance with the damage caused to another person in order to avoid unrest in society.
In the case where Muslims live in a secular state, punishment is carried out in accordance with current legislation. At the same time, punishment is not an end in itself. The goal is to awaken the restraining principle through knowledge of the severity of punishment, which will prevent a person from committing such a destructive sin. Additionally, lack of repentance or actual punishment in this life exacerbates hellish punishment in eternity. And life is years that fly by like a moment.
Any significant doubt about the involvement of the accused in the crime cancels the punishment, for example, in the form of the death penalty. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him) emphasized: “Punishments are canceled (cancelled) by doubts [about the involvement of the accused in a given crime]”[12].
If the case did not reach the court and concerns only the person himself (the victim of the offense is only himself) or touched another, but he forgave the criminal, then it can remain between the offender and the Creator of all things, when there is awareness of sin, repentance and intentionality not come back to this in the future. When the case comes to court, there is no turning back, except if there are reasonable doubts about the obviousness of the crime[13].
“Whoever responds to an atrocity with equivalent evil (will fight back the oppressor) [14] [not with a crime for a crime, but with a demand for material, for example, or moral compensation for damage], but then will be oppressed again [morally crushed, expelled, exiled, destroyed by his offender ], God will certainly help him [will help him, despite the fact that it would be more noble for a believer to be able to forgive, and not waste himself emotionally, physically, financially on retribution]. The Almighty can forgive everything [although he may not forgive if faith is only in language, and in deeds there is obvious godlessness and aggression, spilling out at the first opportunity]” (Holy Quran, 22:60).
*
“Retribution for evil is similar evil (equivalent evil). But whoever forgives [the one who offended him] and corrects [the situation, relationships, can transform the hostile hostility of his enemy into trusting, and possibly friendly relationships], then for such - reward from the Lord himself [it will be indescribably great, commensurate with His boundless mercy and generosity]. Truly, He [the Creator of all things] does not love those who oppress (those who offend, infringe on the rights and freedoms of others, those who oppress)” (Holy Quran, 42:40).
I note that the opinions of Islamic scholars agree that both intentional and unintentional killings can be forgiven to the offender. “It is better to forgive than to punish,” theologians said.
The Holy Quran repeatedly says: “... whoever refuses retribution (forgives as if giving alms), then this is atonement for him [that is, forgiveness before the Almighty for the guilty and reward (atonement for sins) for the forgiver].”
It is also important to recall that in all cases when people came to the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him) with requests for physical punishment or retribution, he always called for forgiveness and a peaceful resolution of the conflict[15]. When insults or attacks concerned him, he always forgave[16]>.
*
“If a person wants to repay the same to the one who oppressed him [demands retribution, justice, compensation], then no one has the right to prevent this (punish him for this)” (Holy Koran, 42:41).
As mentioned earlier, the oppressed, deceived, offended, humiliated person has every right not to forgive the offender, but to legally demand justice and the triumph of justice, appropriate compensation, which cannot exceed the damage caused. Such procedures are carried out only through official judicial bodies. Lynching is strictly prohibited in Islam. Those who commit lynching deserve to be punished as a criminal. The desire to punish oneself fairly does not justify the criminal actions of the victim.
St. Bartholomew's Night
For centuries, religion has been one of the main reasons for war, as well as atrocities, and the massacre on St. Day. Bartholomew in 1572 is proof of this.
The French Wars of Religion were in full swing at this time. Therefore, on the eve of the feast of St. Bartholomew, King Charles IX convinced his mother to brutally murder the French Protestants known as Huguenots. Subsequently, this led to 100 thousand deaths.
