Essay on crimes and their elements
Introduction
The crime is that theory that piece by piece elaborates the basic concept and emerges the different essential elements common to all forms of crime. This theory is of doctrinal creation, although it is based on legal precepts;deals with the elements or requirements of all crimes understood as a general institution. Starting from the definition of crime, the theory of crime is structured, dividing into: types of subject, action (or behavior), typicity, unlawfulness, guilt and punishability (or penalty). Although crime theory is completely accepted, there are differences in relations between its elements and the components of each of them.
Developing
Throughout history, jurists have developed the study of different systems on crime theory, which organize and consider their elements differently.
These crime elements are made up of. The action or behavior, typicity, antijuricity, guilt, we must remember if each of them is not configured, there is no punishable act. This theory is of doctrinal creation, although it is based on legal precepts;deals with the elements or requirements of all crimes understood as a general institution. Starting from the definition of crime, the theory of crime is structured, dividing into: types of subject, action (or behavior), typicity, unlawfulness, guilt and punishability (or penalty). Although crime theory is completely accepted, there are differences in relations between its elements and the components of each of them
That is, the structure of the crime theory is similar to a four -step staircase;Where, each of the steps is called one of the elements that make up the punishable act
- The first step is called "Behavior"
- The second step is called "typicity"
- The third step is named "Antijuridicidad"
- The fourth step is titled "Guilt"
Namely:
- Behavior requires, at least, will and exteriorization
- The typicity requires that the elements of both the objective and subjective type have been configured
- The precise antijuridicity, in order to pass it, the absence of causes of justification
- Guilt, on the other hand, requires: imputability or criminal capacity, the potential knowledge of the unlawful of acting, as well as the enforceability
Human action or behavior
The behavior is voluntary or involuntary behavior which in which it produces a result, which is why the behavior can be described by two forms, that is, by action and omission.
- Work active (commission): requires a voluntary act, product of the agent’s awareness and will.
- It requires an external body act that produces a modification of the outside world.
- It requires that the act be provided for in the law as a crime.
- Work liabilities (omission).
- It requires voluntary inactivity.
- Requires the existence of a legal duty to act
Typicity: It is the adequacy of a fact committed to the description that is made in the criminal law, by imperative of the principle of legality, only the facts typified in the criminal law by the legislator are considered as crimes, that adaptation to theDescription of the standard or type corresponds exclusively to the judge. When talking about typicity we express that this act must adapt to one of the criminal types described by the legislator, that is, a description of the behaviors and material results harmful to a legal good
The term typicity aims to show so that the crime exists, it is necessary that such conduct be previously typified, and subsequently, there is a adjustment to the behavior to the criminal norm, since such action damages social coexistence, so it must beto sanction with a penalty, thus avoiding any authority abuse its power in order to harm someone. The writer Beling manifests. "There is no crime without typicity" the function has a primary typicity particularly because it coincides with the descriptive face of the crime, and this description can only be carried out by the legislator.
The negative aspect of unlawfulness is the cause of justification, which is a presumably criminal fact, we can say: there is no crime, due to the existence of a cause of justification, that is, the individual has acted in a certain way without the spirit of transgressingThe criminal norms.
ANTIJURICIDAD: THE TYPEADIST FRANCISCO MUÑOZ CONDE IN HIS GENERAL THEORY OF CRIME. Expresses "it is the negative trial of value that falls on human behavior and that indicates that this behavior is contrary to the demands of the legal system" because it has produced damage or has put in danger a protected legal good, the antijuricity is described, whenThe defendants violate the criminal rule. And in it the criminal law is violated and the legal good protected by the State. The function of criminal law is to protect the order that is valued by the community
The negative aspect of unlawfulness is the cause of justification, which is a presumably criminal fact, we can say: there is no crime, due to the existence of a cause of justification, that is, the individual has acted in a certain way without the spirit of transgressingThe criminal norms.
Guilt: It is the responsibility of an author or participant, that is, the realization of an unlawful action, and for this, there is an imputability of the active subject and that must know the nature contrary to the law of his behavior
It is based on the author of the criminal offense, of the typical and unlawful fact, has the psychic and physical faculties to commit an illicit. It is what is known as guilt capacity, that capacity is determined by psychic maturity, and by the faculty of the subject to motivate itself, that is, it must behave cognitive content that translates into intent, guilt refers to a trial of a trial ofreproach by which it must be analyzed if the defendants have the ability to be convicted. Keep in mind that behavior is prosecuted, that is, the punishable act. The behavior is guilty when attributed to the author. It is attributable or reproachable to its author when that author was able to prevent a certain conduct he was doing, which was prohibited and also had the ability to act according to that understanding. It is necessary to identify the two forms of guilt. The intent and guilt. The first intention. The second negligence, both have as its basis the will of the active subject
The guilt is considered as the last dogmatic category, or known as the judgment of reproach of society to punishable action, which identifies the subjective elements that constitute the intent, and the guilt, in the criminal type, is sitting in the intent andWithin the direct intent there is a mastery of the factual fact of the type by the processing that there is a psychological relationship between the active subject and the result
Jurisprudence, doctrine and law teach us that all infraction is composed of two elements, the material, and the will that has led to the fact that it is the moral element. This will consists only of wanting an act that is contrary to the criminal law, whatever, on the other hand, the reason or object that the agent has determined to the criminal resolution or as the criminalists say, is the intent.
Conclusions
The crime is any punishable action or omission, objectified in the manifestation of a fact provided for in the criminal law, which has a sanction, also provided for in the same criminal law, in order to inhibit the individual to the commission of these behaviorsconsidered as crimes.
It can be thought that the types of crimes, which is susceptible to rights or obligations, that is, par excellence is the person either human or physical or collective physical one who performs it consciously or not. As for the ability of the person to be judged, it will depend on what type of crime has committed. It can also be concluded that the classification of crime can be carried out against the nation, a person, work, family and thus endless reasons why they are carried out. The aforementioned classification and the types of crimes described above can also be unknown if it is not investigated and knows deeply, but there are minimal things that can be considered a crime and are punishable by law.
Leave feedback