基于博弈模型的“罪刑均衡”思想分析

罪刑均衡思想由来已久,作为刑法理论中最基本的刑罚原则,在对犯人进行科处刑罚方面具有的重要意义早已得到承认,而在预防犯罪方面具有的作用却长期被忽视。犯罪行为实质上是犯人和政府之间的博弈。政府先制订刑法,犯人在观察到刑罚后才选择是否犯罪以及犯何种性质的罪。经济分析表明,改变刑罚的确定性和严厉性就能影响博弈的均衡,从而影响犯罪,刑罚之外的其它措施如果能改变犯罪的成本和收益,也能实现同样的目的,这为预防犯罪提供了一种新的思路。     

以计算机为手段的财产犯罪的既遂认定

以计算机为手段实施的财产犯罪成为现代社会一种新的财产犯罪形式,由于这种犯罪形式的特殊性,在判断该罪既遂与未遂的问题上,刑法理论上产生了激烈的争议.基于对外国立法的比较,以及对我国刑法理论上争议的考察,我国刑法应当以行为人修改数据的行为实施为该罪的着手时间,依据行为人对于其所虚增的财产数据所代表的财产是否实现了事实上的控制或者支配为既遂的认定标准,严厉打击以计算机为工具实施的财产犯罪的未遂行为.     

犯罪本质二元论新说

犯罪本质一元论把社会危害性作为犯罪的唯一本质特征,把应受刑罚惩罚性看做社会危害性和刑事违法性的当然结果,不仅使得犯罪三特征之间的逻辑关系存在矛盾,而且不能科学地解释犯罪与犯罪构成、犯罪与刑罚之间的关系。重新认识应受刑罚惩罚性的含义,把应受刑罚惩罚性作为犯罪的主观特征,把社会危害性作为犯罪的客观特征,即犯罪本质二元论,不仅使犯罪三特征之间的逻辑关系更加严密,而且能科学地解释犯罪、犯罪构成、刑罚等诸范畴之间的关系。     

刑法身份与身份犯之身份新论

刑法身份是指法律规定的,对定罪量刑具有影响的一定的个人要素或一定的单位附属条件.这里的"定罪"是指在确定对行为者适用刑法并追究其刑事责任或适用刑罚的前提下才予以考虑的确定具体罪名的司法活动或立法活动,有别于确定刑法适用范围、应当追究刑事责任的活动."量刑"指的是在定罪的前提下对行为者选择适用刑种和刑期,甚或包括免除刑罚的一种司法或立法活动.刑法身份具有法律事实特征、本质特征和刑法性特征,可以分为:自然人刑法身份与单位刑法身份,定罪刑法身份与量刑刑法身份,主体刑法身份与对象刑法身份,明文规定式刑法身份与暗含式刑法身份,积极刑法身份与消极刑法身份,自然刑法身份与法定刑法身份等.身份犯之身份,是指法律规定的行为者在行为时所具有的影响定罪量刑的个人要素或单位附属条件.其除具有刑法身份一般特征外,还具有犯罪主体依附性特征和时间性特征.     

反思与重构:对结合犯概念的再思考

对结合犯概念的揭示应注意以下几个方面:不能脱离结合犯的初始意义,应反映结合犯的本质内涵和立法目的,不能脱离法律的实证规定,不能混淆规范刑法学与本体刑法学的界限,不能脱离犯罪成立的理论体系.所谓结合犯是指立法者基于特定立法目的的考虑,将两个具有内在联系性的犯罪(构成要件)规定为独立犯罪(构成要件)的情况.     

破产犯罪研究

随着市场经济的发展,破产已经成为社会经济生活中的自然现象,与之相关的破产犯罪日渐猖獗,对社会的危害也愈加严重。我国关于破产犯罪的立法存在严重缺陷和不足,不能适应打击和预防破产犯罪的需要,应加以完善。     

手机取证及其应用——以职务犯罪侦查为剖析视角

随着移动通信技术的发展和应用的推广,手机犯罪成为了新的犯罪趋势,手机取证成为打击犯罪的有效手段,在职务犯罪侦查中发挥着重要作用.当前,手机取证技术还不成熟,因电子数据的不稳定性和手机系统软件的特殊性,手机取证在设备配置、软件升级、取证标准、规范,以及技术人员培养等方面还面临着严峻挑战.应对挑战,应当以云技术为基础,在全国范围建立手机取证数据的统一管理平台,设定取证标准、规范,建立有效的机制培养专业取证人才,最终全面提高取证能力.     

Gendered Movement: Negotiating Youth,Sex and Harm in the US Carceral State

Exempt from the current bipartisan reassessment of the US carceral state are people with convictions for sex offenses. While movements against public registries for sex offenders are scant, a grassroots movement is underway. This article offers a preliminary analysis of the complex consequence of women's political work to extract their sons from the US carceral state. This gendered advocacy is mapped against shifts in the racialised US criminal justice system, where the fluid category of child/juvenile is often unavailable to youth of colour and/or queer youth, and criminalisation is offered to regulate sexuality, consent, age and potential harm.     

Sexual Orientation in State Hate Crime Laws: Exploring Social Construction and Criminal Law

Several studies have described and analyzed the development and diffusion of hate crime laws in the United States, but none specifically examined state-level differences in protected categories. Forty-five of the 50 states have a hate crime statute, but only 30 of those include sexual orientation. In this study the social construction framework is applied to the hate crime policy domain in order to determine whether or not variations in the social and political status of gays and lesbians are associated with the inclusion of sexual orientation in state hate crime laws. Content analysis of daily newspapers in six states revealed that a positive social construction is associated with groups seeking hate crime law protections, and that political influence may also be a key factor.     

Self‐Esteem,the Fear of Crime,and the Decision to Protect Oneself From Victimization

This research extends prior work that examines self‐esteem as an outcome of protective behaviors against crime victimization by focusing instead on the moderating influence of self‐esteem on the relationship between the fear of crime and the decision to protect oneself from victimization. The fear of crime is conceptualized as two separate components (fear of victimization and perceived risk) in accordance with prior work. Self‐esteem is conceptualized as three separate components (worth, efficacy, and authenticity), and measured with a recently designed instrument for capturing each aspect of self‐esteem separately. Data are collected through surveys of a population at high risk for victimization (undergraduate college students). Logistic regression analyses demonstrate that self‐esteem does play a role for deciding whether to engage in protective behaviors, and that the specific components of self‐esteem moderate defensive behavioral outcomes differently. Specifically, the self‐worth, self‐efficacy, and authenticity components of self‐esteem influence the decision to carry protection, but not the decision to take a self‐defense class. Implications for both the fear of crime and self‐esteem literatures are addressed.