Retaining the death penalty and strict restricting the application of the death penalty is now a basic criminal policy in China, and from the judicial level, the key to the restriction of the death penalty is to study...Retaining the death penalty and strict restricting the application of the death penalty is now a basic criminal policy in China, and from the judicial level, the key to the restriction of the death penalty is to study what lenient sentencing discretion the criminal has to constitute ＂not to execute immediately＂ when he has reached the standard of the immediate execution of the death penalty, to cross the chasm from the immediate execution of the death penalty to the death sentence with a reprieve. The basic process of the sentencing is to establish a baseline punishment on the basis of the social harmfulness of the activities of the criminal, and then measure the profits and losses according to the offender＇s personal danger. Therefore, although the social harmfulness of the activities of the criminal reaches the standard of the ＂most heinous crimes＂, due to the existence of the fault of the victim, active compensation for the victim, and the motives of the small blames and other lenient sentencing discretions, the criminal＇s danger has not reached the degree of ＂flagrance＂. Apply the death sentence with a two-year reprieve and even the life imprisonment generally. If there are some strict sentencing discretions, such as ＂the crime means is extremely cruel＂, carefully consider the use of the immediate execution of the death penalty. Under the circumstances of the concurrence of the sentencing, carry on the overall consideration based on the comprehensive measurement of various circumstances of the sentencing.展开更多
This empirical study of legal interpretation takes as its sample all ＂capital crimes＂ from among the Supreme Court＇s exemplary cases. The study finds significant variations in which crimes are construed as being ca...This empirical study of legal interpretation takes as its sample all ＂capital crimes＂ from among the Supreme Court＇s exemplary cases. The study finds significant variations in which crimes are construed as being capital crimes, which capital crimes carry the death penalty, and whether the death sentence is carried out immediately. Based on these findings, the author concludes that legal interpretation involves both normative and autonomous judgments, and that the law itself should be clarified to the maximum extent possible so as to bring about a greater degree of standardization in the application of the death penalty.展开更多
文摘Retaining the death penalty and strict restricting the application of the death penalty is now a basic criminal policy in China, and from the judicial level, the key to the restriction of the death penalty is to study what lenient sentencing discretion the criminal has to constitute ＂not to execute immediately＂ when he has reached the standard of the immediate execution of the death penalty, to cross the chasm from the immediate execution of the death penalty to the death sentence with a reprieve. The basic process of the sentencing is to establish a baseline punishment on the basis of the social harmfulness of the activities of the criminal, and then measure the profits and losses according to the offender＇s personal danger. Therefore, although the social harmfulness of the activities of the criminal reaches the standard of the ＂most heinous crimes＂, due to the existence of the fault of the victim, active compensation for the victim, and the motives of the small blames and other lenient sentencing discretions, the criminal＇s danger has not reached the degree of ＂flagrance＂. Apply the death sentence with a two-year reprieve and even the life imprisonment generally. If there are some strict sentencing discretions, such as ＂the crime means is extremely cruel＂, carefully consider the use of the immediate execution of the death penalty. Under the circumstances of the concurrence of the sentencing, carry on the overall consideration based on the comprehensive measurement of various circumstances of the sentencing.
文摘This empirical study of legal interpretation takes as its sample all ＂capital crimes＂ from among the Supreme Court＇s exemplary cases. The study finds significant variations in which crimes are construed as being capital crimes, which capital crimes carry the death penalty, and whether the death sentence is carried out immediately. Based on these findings, the author concludes that legal interpretation involves both normative and autonomous judgments, and that the law itself should be clarified to the maximum extent possible so as to bring about a greater degree of standardization in the application of the death penalty.
