How to get a suspended sentence under Article 111
Hello! My husband and his friend entered into an intimate relationship with an underage girl. When they met, she hid her age, although they asked her if she looked about 17-18 years old. In general, on this ill-fated day they drank strong drinks and got up in apartment and continued the “banquet” playing strip cards. According to the husband, the following happened: - the girl entered the room and called her first husband, they had intimacy, after which she called another guy and the same thing happened to him. After these actions, she was with another the guy went to his house, went to the store and bought more strong drinks there, and on the way to the house they had another intimate relationship. Arriving at the other guy’s house, his grandmother did not want to let her in, to which she did not go anywhere , but simply continued to stand outside his apartment, saying that she had nowhere to go to spend the night, after time and much persuasion, the grandmother took pity and let her home with her. In general, after all the sexual acts committed, it became known that this guy had previously met with her adult sister and they did not part with her very well. In general, this girl told everything to her sister where, what and with whom she had done, and she took her to write a statement of rape. Forensic experts refuted this fact, since there were no signs of violence, but opened a case of sexual relations with a minor. Our lawyers advised us to write a confession, thereby complicating the case. There was a trial, they gave the husband 12, and the other 13 years. What to do now and how to reduce the term, because this term is very long, especially since at the time of the crime they did not know her age and she was not against entering into a relationship with them, and the girl at the time of the crime was far from a virgin and leads an immoral lifestyle at the age of 13, she walks until the morning, may not come home, drinks and smokes, her mother does not worry about her and does not look after her. This girl is periodically seen in drunken companies with men worse than her. According to some sources, she entered into an intimate relationship with a 30-year-old man. Of course, I do not justify my husband at all and I believe that must be punished, but in the form of suspended imprisonment, or a maximum punishment of 3-4 years, but not 12 years. After all, he is a normal, adequate person, 2 higher educations, graduated from college with honors, he has very good characteristics, and so do we. dependent on a 4-year-old daughter. If he knew about her age, he would not even talk to her. Peers and classmates of this girl also confirm and testify in court that the girl communicates with older people and that she leads such a lifestyle as I wrote, but the court apparently didn’t take this into account. And before the trial, this girl’s family asked for a ransom, if we bought her a car, they would take the testimony, but at that time they couldn’t record it on a tape recorder, or rather, they didn’t even think about it. Evidence in fact, there is nothing against them, but due to the incompetence of the lawyers, they wrote an appearance, and this is already significant. What to do in this situation, how can I reduce the sentence, I really ask you to help me in this situation, I really hope that you can tell me what what to do, or where to go or collect some other evidence against this girl and prove that she has such a lifestyle, please tell me. I’m waiting for an answer to my cry from the soul! Thank you in advance.
Intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm (Article 111)
Article 111. Intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm
According to clause 5 of the Rules for determining the severity of harm caused to human health dated August 17, 2007, harm to human health is understood as a violation of the anatomical integrity and physiological function of human organs and tissues as a result of exposure to physical, chemical, biological and mental environmental factors. Harm depends on its severity and is determined in accordance with the medical criteria for its determination.
Object of the crime:
- generic – social relations in the field of personal protection;
- specific - public relations in the sphere of protecting human life and health;
- direct - social relations that develop regarding the realization by a person of the natural right to health and guaranteeing the safety of this good.
Victim – any individual.
The objective side is characterized by illegal actions that entailed any of the socially dangerous consequences listed in Part 1 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation:
1) life-threatening harm (causing a life-threatening condition that can result in death; this can be either bodily injury or diseases and pathological conditions);
2) non-life-threatening types of harm related to grave harm in terms of consequences:
- loss of vision, speech, hearing, loss of any organ or loss of an organ’s functions;
- abortion;
- mental disorder, drug addiction or substance abuse;
- permanent facial disfigurement;
- harm that caused a significant permanent loss of general ability to work by at least 1/3 or, knowingly for the perpetrator, a complete loss of professional ability to work by the victim.
Termination of pregnancy, regardless of its duration, is recognized as serious harm to health if it is causally determined by the behavior of the perpetrator, and not by the individual characteristics of the victim’s body or her diseases. It is also important to establish that the perpetrator, when causing the damage, was aware of the pregnant state of the victim.
To determine the severity of harm as grave, one of the provisions mentioned in Art. 111 signs.
The corpus delicti is material.
Subject is a sane individual who has reached the age of 14 years.
The subjective side of the crime provided for in Part 1 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code, is characterized by both direct and indirect intent. At the same time, intentional infliction of harm, assessed as grave based on the danger to life, should be distinguished from attempted murder precisely on the subjective side. An attempt is made only with direct intent: the perpetrator, realizing the social danger of the shot he made, stabbing him, giving poison, etc., foresees the possibility or inevitability of the death of the victim and wishes to cause this harm. In contrast, this type of grievous harm presupposes indirect intent regarding the fact of death, due to the fact that it did not occur, the act is qualified under Part 1 of Art. 111.
If death from the inflicted damage, dangerous to the life of the victim, actually occurs, if there is indirect intent, the act is regarded as murder. If a desire for death is established at the time of causing life-threatening harm, the act is qualified either as murder (if death has occurred) or as attempted murder (if actual deprivation of life has not occurred). If there is a careless attitude towards the death of the victim when intentionally causing harm dangerous to life, there is a crime with two forms of guilt (Article 27 of the Criminal Code).
Responsibility for intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm is differentiated through qualifying and especially qualifying circumstances listed in parts 2-4 of Art. 111. The content of these signs in terms of basic parameters is similar to those provided for in Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code in relation to murder.
Demarcation from adjacent trains
The greatest public danger and at the same time difficulty in qualification is provided by Part 4 of Art. 111 type of intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm, resulting in the death of the victim through negligence. Outwardly, this crime resembles murder; for example, a knife blow to a vital part of the body causing death. In one case, such an act can be regarded as murder, in another - as a crime under Part 4 of Art. 111.
The distinction must first of all be made on the subjective side. In the act described in Part 4 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code, it consists of two subjects of subjective attitude:
- grievous harm to health - there is intent (direct or indirect), i.e. the perpetrator foresees at least the possibility of grave harm to the victim’s health and desires or consciously allows these consequences (or is indifferent to them). If the perpetrator did not have the intent to cause grievous harm to health, especially if there was no intent to cause harm to health in general, the imputation of Part 4 of Art. 111 is out of the question. This is the majority of situations of so-called indirect death (blow or push - fall - hitting your head on a hard surface - death).
- death - a person commits negligence. It either foresees the possibility of death from intentionally inflicting serious harm, but without sufficient grounds arrogantly hopes to prevent death (frivolity), or does not foresee such a possibility, although with the necessary care and forethought it should and could have foreseen this (negligence). This is, for example, the situation when a knife is stabbed in the thigh, damaging a large blood artery, and death occurs from acute blood loss.
An example of erroneous classification
An example of erroneous qualification in the absence of intent to harm health is the following case. During an argument, Ya. hit K. with his fist. The blow hit his neck. K. fell and died from traumatic shock and reflex cardiac arrest. Ya. was convicted of intentionally causing grievous harm, resulting in the death of K. through negligence. Qualifying the act as careless deprivation of life, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation indicated that there was no evidence of Ya.’s intent to cause grievous harm to K.’s health, since Ya. intended to inflict K. ... a blow to the face, but he dodged and the blow landed in the neck, in a vital part of the body.
Regarding the criteria for distinguishing between murder and the intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm resulting in the death of the victim through negligence, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its resolution dated January 27, 1999 No. 1 “On judicial practice in murder cases (Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)” emphasized that, when deciding The question of the content of the intent of the perpetrator must be based on the totality of all the circumstances of the crime. In particular, it is necessary to take into account the method and weapon of the crime, the number, nature and location of damage (for example, injuries to the vital organs of the victim), as well as the behavior of the perpetrator and the victim preceding the crime and subsequent behavior, their relationship (paragraph 2, paragraph 3).
0
1.6038696537678
How did the lawyer help?
In this situation, all the facts testified against the accused. The necessary defense was not confirmed, since there was no real threat to Duleva’s life and health from the victim. It was quite difficult for the lawyer to find an opportunity to mitigate the punishment at least a little, but I succeeded.
- Have you or your family found yourself in a similar situation?
- Don't waste precious time, don't give up!
- The sooner you call, the greater the chance of a successful outcome!
8-916-061-64-01
The main argument was that the accused struck the victim as a result of a sudden hostility after he struck her several times. To do this, a number of witnesses were questioned, the necessary examinations were carried out, an investigative experiment was carried out, and a number of confrontations were carried out. The court took into account the presence of bodily injuries on the defendant's face. As a result, this became a mitigating circumstance that spared the defendant from actually serving her sentence.
