Criminal Law and Time: Effects on Offense Characterization

Extract

[...] In the first case, it considers that the causal link is uncertain and in the second, on the other hand, that it is certain. In this case, Bernard performed the operation on the victim of the accident, he simply left the hospital without giving any further instructions to the night nurse, but this did not bother him more than that as she was experienced. However, she administered a bad medicine that would thus lead to death. As the patient died and this happened in a purely involuntary manner, we can only place ourselves in the framework of involuntary homicide of Article 221-6 of the Penal Code. [...]

[...] On the sexual nature facts suffered by the young actress A director makes a casting call to an actress and during the process he asks her to undress, she agrees but then he makes her sexual propositions. He is then pursued for attempted rape. Is this the correct penal qualification? The rejection of rape Article 222-23 of the Penal Code states that rape is 'any act of sexual penetration of any nature, committed on the person of another or on the person of the author by violence, constraint or surprise'. [...]

[...] The case of Catherine We are always in the framework of Articles 121-3 and 221-6 of the Penal Code relating to non-intentional offenses and involuntary homicide, it is not necessary to go into detail on the legal elements of these texts. In this case, the patient died after suffering from post-operative complications and by taking a completely contraindicated medication that Catherine had given him, without waiting for Bernard's arrival at the hospital, which she had notified and would arrive shortly. [...]

[...] General deceit corresponds to what the author wanted to commit the act of sexual penetration, but in addition he had knowledge of the absence of consent from the victim. Most often this is deduced from the nature of the means used by the author. In this case, the director asked the actress to undress, which she accepted since it was for the needs of the film. Then, he simply made her sexual propositions, so there was no act of sexual penetration. Therefore, since the material element of the offense is not present, rape cannot be characterized. [...]

[...] This means that the author of an attempt will incur the same penal sanction as the author of the consummated offense. The second text, on the other hand, provides the two conditions for the attempt to be characterized. It will thus be necessary, a beginning of execution and an absence of voluntary withdrawal. The beginning of execution, as the Lacour judgment said, is 'the act that must have as a direct and immediate consequence of consummating the crime, this one being entered into its execution period'. [...]