Chengdu Law Firm: What are the evidentiary requirements for the crime of causing death by negligence?

This article was edited and compiled by Hu Yun's team (Hu Yun: Founder of Sichuan Hu Yun Law Firm, Director of the Management Committee, Director of the Criminal Law Professional Committee, and has been practicing for 20 years, focusing on the defense and representation of major and extraordinarily serious criminal cases for a long time. Good at defending and representing major difficult and complicated cases such as job-related crimes, economic crimes, new network crimes, and drug crimes)

Sichuan Hu Yun Law Firm Hu Yun

Guidance on evidence for the crime of causing death by negligence

1. Crime: The crime of causing death by negligence

Refers to the act of causing death due to negligence.

2. Laws and judicial interpretations

(1) Article 233 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China: Whoever causes death by negligence shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years; Where this Law provides otherwise, follow those provisions.

(2) Circumstances otherwise provided for in the Criminal Law that cause death include: fire, negligence in water, inadvertent release of dangerous substances, negligence in explosion, etc. provided for in article 115, paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law, resulting in death;

3. Evidentiary requirements for approval of arrest

(1) There is evidence to prove that the criminal fact of causing death by negligence has occurred

1. Cases of death caused by negligence occur. Basic evidence includes documentary evidence such as the case registration form, the case filing decision, the occurrence of the case issued by the public security organ, and the proof of cracking the case;

2. The victim dies. Basic evidence includes on-site inquest records, extract product lists, medical certificates of death of residents, autopsy photos and autopsy reports;

3. The identity of the victim. Basic evidence includes DNA appraisal opinions, identification records, witness testimony, relevant documentary evidence and other evidence;

4. The identity of the criminal suspect as the subject. Collect materials proving the identity information of criminal suspects, including household registration certificates, identity cards, and other such materials.

(2) There is evidence proving that the death caused by negligence was carried out by the criminal suspect

1. The criminal suspect was present at the time of the crime. Basic evidence includes confessions of criminal suspects, witness testimony and identification records, and on-site audio-visual materials.

2. The criminal suspect has committed relevant acts. Basic evidence includes criminal suspects' confessions, witness testimony, scene photos and investigation records, on-site extracts, traces of expert opinions, audio-visual materials, and so forth.

3. There is a criminal law causal relationship between the negligent act and the death of the victim. Basic evidence includes criminal suspects' confessions, witness testimony and identification records, audio-visual materials, appraisal opinions, relevant documentary evidence, and so forth.

(3) There is evidence proving that the criminal suspect is subjectively negligent

The most direct evidence is the criminal suspect's confession and defense, but the subjective aspects of the criminal suspect shall be comprehensively determined by combining evidence such as the time and place of the crime, the specific history of the crime, what measures the criminal suspect took at the time of the crime, and the relationship between the criminal suspect and the victim. Basic evidence includes confessions of criminal suspects, statements by victims, witness testimony, on-site inspections, and inspection records.

(4) In the assessment and review of social danger, it is necessary to ascertain the cause of the crime, the circumstances of the crime, whether there is a criminal settlement, and whether the conditions for release on guarantee pending further investigation are met, and the basic evidence includes: (1) legal documents such as a judgment proving a previous conviction, a release certificate, and an administrative punishment decision; (2) a case that proves the circumstances of voluntary surrender, confession, etc.; (3) a case filing decision, judgment, and circumstances proving the circumstances of meritorious service; (4) an agreement or receipt proving compensation, understanding, and other circumstances ;(5) Hospital diagnosis certificate of major illness, female suspect pregnancy, breastfeeding, etc.; (6) "Real Estate Right Certificate", "Housing Lease Contract", "Labor Contract", etc. that prove that the criminal suspect has a fixed residence and a fixed occupation.

IV. Review the evidentiary requirements for prosecution

(1) The chain of evidence and the facts and evidence to be verified

1. In reviewing cases of death caused by negligence, it is necessary to find out how the case was known to the investigating organs, and the basic evidence includes: (1) the record of receiving the alarm and the registration form of the case made by the public security organ; (2) the first aid record, the victim's medical record information, and the medical certificate of the death of the resident; (3) the confession of the criminal suspect and the testimony of witnesses.

2. To verify the facts of the crime, it is necessary to ascertain the perpetrator, the time of the crime, the place of the crime, the means of committing the crime, the cause of the crime and the course of the crime, the harmful consequences and the causal relationship, and the subjective state. The basic evidence corresponding to this link varies depending on the type of crime of causing death by negligence.

3. After the crime, it is necessary to ascertain the details of each link of the contradiction or development in the process of the crime, including the special constitution of the criminal subject, the cause of the case, the behavior of the personnel involved in the contradiction or development, the tools or equipment involved, etc.

4. Harmful consequences and causal relationship To ascertain the facts of the victim's death and the causal relationship with the criminal act, the basic evidence that should be collected and reviewed includes: (1) audio-visual materials such as electrocardiograms and medical aid recordings issued by 120; (2) medical records such as injury examination notices, admission records, surgical records, radiological diagnosis reports, discharge summaries, and resident death confirmations; (3) forensic autopsy appraisal certificates and pathological judicial appraisal opinions; (4) confessions and witness testimonies of criminal suspects.

In cases where the victim himself suffered from an illness before the crime occurred and the illness was the direct cause of death, and the criminal suspect's conduct was the cause of the illness, the investigators should collect the relevant medical history materials of the victim before the crime.

5. In cases where two or more people have jointly caused death by negligence, attention should be paid to collecting relevant evidence on the causal relationship between the behavior of each criminal subject and the death result and the proportion of causal force, such as the causal relationship test analysis opinion, etc., to clarify the division of responsibilities of each subject.

6. The subjective state should be ascertained as to whether the criminal suspect was subjectively negligent when committing the criminal act, that is, the outcome of the victim's death should be foreseen, but it could not be foreseen due to negligence or overconfidence, and the basic evidence that should be collected and reviewed includes: the confession of the criminal suspect and the testimony of witnesses.

7. The performance before and after the crime and other sentencing circumstances also need to find out whether the criminal suspect actively rescued, protected the scene, rescued the injured, reported to the public security organs, and other such acts after the accident, whether he found someone to "top the bag", destroyed the evidence of the crime, interfered with the testimony of witnesses, attempted to escape, whether he paid compensation, and whether he reached an understanding with the victim. The evidence that should be collected and reviewed is primarily:

The basic evidence proving the criminal suspect's rescue behavior after the crime occurred includes: (1) confirming the call records of the criminal suspect making emergency calls and calling the police after the crime; (2) audio-visual materials confirming that the criminal suspect protected the scene and taking first aid measures against the injured; (3) witness testimony and the criminal suspect's confession.

The basic evidence to prove the criminal suspect's escape behavior after the crime includes: (1) GPS data of the motor vehicle driving or road surveillance video that proves the criminal suspect's escape route; (2) call records, text messages or WeChat chat records; (3) witness testimony and confessions of the criminal suspect.

To prove compensation and understanding, the basic evidence that should be collected and reviewed is: (1) compensation agreement, compensation certificate (receipt, transfer voucher, medical invoice, etc.) ;(2) letter of understanding; (3) victim statements, witness testimony, and confessions of criminal suspects that can confirm the payment situation.

For cases where civil compensation has already been decided by the people's court, proof of payment of the judgment amount such as the civil judgment and the transfer record of the insurance claim payment shall also be collected and reviewed.

8. Although the criminal suspect caused the death result, due to the specificity of the criminal environment, the particularity of the criminal object, the prominence of the object of the crime, and the difference in the subjective state, the specific crime constituted may change:

(1) Where the location of the crime is within the scope of public transportation management, and the occurrence of the death of the victim caused by illegal traffic management regulations may constitute a crime such as the crime of traffic accident;

(2) Where the object of the crime is explosive, flammable, radioactive, poisonous or corrosive, it may constitute the crime of causing an accident with dangerous goods;

(3) Where the perpetrator subjectively intentionally injures or intentionally kills, it may constitute the crime of intentional injury or intentional homicide;

(4) Where the Criminal Law has other special provisions, the special provisions shall apply. For example, it may constitute the crime of fire, the crime of negligent water determination, the crime of negligent explosion, the crime of negligent release of dangerous substances, the crime of negligently endangering public safety by dangerous means, the crime of negligent destruction of means of transportation, the crime of negligent damage to transportation facilities, the crime of negligent damage to power equipment, the crime of negligent destruction of inflammable and explosive equipment, the crime of major liability accidents, major labor safety accidents, and major safety accidents in educational facilities.

(2) Evidence collection and review of various types of negligent deaths

1. According to the characteristics of the evidence structure and the degree of complexity and simplicity of the part of the crime that is verified in the facts of the crime, the case of death caused by negligence can be divided into cases of death caused by negligence and cases of death caused by omission.

2. Cases of death caused by negligence refer to cases in which the perpetrator actively commits a certain act, and eventually causes the death of the victim due to negligence.

For cases of causing death as type negligence, when investigating the occurrence of the crime, the time, place, and acts committed by the subject of the crime should be ascertained, and the basic evidence that should be collected and reviewed includes: (1) audio-visual materials such as surveillance and mobile phone video; (2) on-site inspection records; (3) extraction traces and physical evidence registration forms; (4) court scientific DNA appraisals and judicial appraisal opinions; (5) witness testimony, confessions of criminal suspects, and identification records.

3. Cases in which the death of a person is caused by omission-type negligence refers to a case in which the perpetrator has a specific legal obligation to carry out a certain positive act, and in fact can do so, but is not carried out due to subjective negligence, which ultimately leads to the death of the victim.

In cases of death caused by omission-type negligence, when investigating and verifying the course of the crime, basic evidence should be collected mainly from the legal facts of the source of the specific obligation and the process of the incident.

4. The legal facts of the source of a specific obligation refer to the events and acts that can give rise to the specific obligations of the actor. The basic evidence that should be collected and reviewed includes:

(1) Documentary evidence confirming the existence of a special relationship between the perpetrator and the victim, such as a marriage certificate, birth certificate, household registration booklet, work permit, student card, relevant contract or agreement, etc.; (2) documentary evidence confirming that the perpetrator has special job responsibilities, such as labor contracts, job performance instructions, etc.; (3) witness testimony, criminal suspect's confession, and identification records.

5. In order to ascertain the cause, development process, and behavior of the criminal subject and the victim in the course of the development of the incident, the basic evidence that should be collected and reviewed includes: (1) audio-visual materials such as surveillance and mobile phone video; (2) on-site inspection records; (3) extraction traces and physical evidence registration forms; (4) court scientific DNA appraisal certificates and judicial appraisal opinions; (5) witness testimony, criminal suspects' confessions, and identification records.

(3) Comprehensive analysis and judgment of evidence

1. The focus of the relationship review in cases of the crime of causing death by negligence

(1) Regarding the criminal personnel and the criminal process, whether the criminal suspect's confession, witness testimony, identification records, surveillance videos and other audio-visual materials, physical evidence such as scene remnants and trace identification, and DNA identification and other appraisal opinions can corroborate each other;

(2) With regard to the subjective state of the subject of the crime, it is necessary to distinguish between the subjective overconfidence of the perpetrator and the death caused by indirect intentional homicide. Both can foresee that their actions may cause the death of the victim, but the death caused by negligence is negative about the death outcome of the victim, and indirect intentional homicide is positive and laissez-faire about the outcome of death. Focus on examining whether my confessions, witness testimony, on-site photographs, surveillance videos and other audio-visual materials on the details of the crime, as well as on-site investigation records, can corroborate each other;

(3) With regard to causation, a distinction should be made between death caused by negligence and accidental events. The biggest difference between the two is that death by negligence should ascertain whether the outcome of the victim's death should have been foreseen by the perpetrator in the circumstances. If the result of death occurs if it should have been foreseen but was not foreseen due to negligence, it is a negligent death; if it is neither intentional nor negligent, but is caused by unforeseen reasons, it is an accident and does not constitute a crime. Whether the confessions of criminal suspects, witness testimony, on-site investigation records, surveillance videos and other audio-visual materials, first aid records, notices of injury examination, hospital diagnosis certificates and medical records, death certificates, medical certificates of death of residents, judicial appraisal opinions, forensic autopsy appraisal certificates, and causal relationship examination and analysis opinions can corroborate each other.

In cases where the victim dies without treatment, if the place where the victim's body was found is not the first scene, a record of on-site inspection and inspection should be made separately at different scenes, photographs of the scene should be taken, and attention should be paid to examining the trajectory of the movement in the victim's location and the connection with the criminal suspect's conduct.

2. Logical analysis between correlated evidence

(1) About criminal acts and subjective states. In order to distinguish it from the characterization of the accident, it should be examined whether the perpetrator should have foreseen the occurrence of the death result under the circumstances at that time, according to the objective conditions of the ability and behavior of the ordinary person, and whether relevant measures to prevent the occurrence of harmful results should be taken. In order to distinguish it from the characterization of intentional homicide, it is necessary to examine whether the criminal has the purpose and motive of killing the murderer; in the case where the victim did not die on the spot, it is necessary to focus on whether the criminal personnel fulfilled their obligation to rescue, whether they fled the scene in order to evade criminal responsibility, or killed the victim for fear that the victim would later reveal his crime.

Because the subjective state belongs to the category of ideas, the direct evidence that can be used to corroborate is only the confession of the criminal suspect. In the course of investigating and handling a case, attention should be paid to the comprehensive evaluation of the evidence in the whole case, and the reinforcement of indirect evidence (including physical evidence, documentary evidence, appraisal opinions, witness testimony, criminal suspect's confession, investigation experiments, etc.) should be carried out from all aspects such as the cause of the case, the relationship between the parties, the cognitive ability of the criminal suspect, whether there is a motive for harm, the means of conduct, the degree and duration of violence committed during the incident, whether relevant safety measures were taken during the incident, and the attitude after the fact), and combined with the above factual elements to examine the subjective state of the criminal suspect at the time of committing the crime.

(2) On causation and division of responsibility. For cases with multiple causes and consequences (i.e. the outcome of the victim's death is caused by two or more causes), the focus should be on:

1. In the objective state at the time of the crime, whether relying on the criminal suspect's own strength is sufficient to cause the victim's death, and whether there is a possibility that other personnel other than the criminal suspect who has been seized will jointly participate in causing the victim's death;

2. Whether the causal relationship between the crime and the outcome of death is interrupted by the intervention of other factors (such as infection due to the doctor's failure to actively rescue or poor wound management).

Fifth, the construction of the evidence chain and the list of evidence

The evidence chain of the crime can be divided into seven links: (1) the source of the clues in the case; (2) the identification of the victim and the cause of death; (3) the investigation of the facts of the crime; (4) the locking of the criminal suspect and the course of the case; (5) the adequacy of the evidence and the exclusive explanation; (6) the performance before and after the crime and other sentencing circumstances; and (7) the suspected crime.