Suppose A kills B s father, and B kills A, how should B be sentenced?

Your statement is unclear, if A killed B's father in the process of **, and B killed A in self-defense, then B is justified defense and does not need to bear criminal responsibility;

However, if A kills B's father, and B later kills A in retaliation, it is an intentional homicide and is punishable by death, life imprisonment, or fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years; where the circumstances are more minor, the sentence is between three and ten years imprisonment.

It is the crime of intentional homicide. Modern times are not ancient, blood relatives are allowed to take revenge, if in ancient times, not only innocent but also filial son, it will be praised. In modern times, only the law has the power to deprive others of their lives.

However, revenge for one's father is always excusable, so the sentence will not be too severe, and intentional homicide is sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of more than 10 years, life imprisonment or death, and if the circumstances are more minor, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years. At the very least, there should be no death penalty.

Intentional homicide.

There is a subjective intentional motive.

Moral friendship is not equal to law, and criminal responsibility and punishment are uniform.

It should be a greater sin than A, because it must be a revenge intentional homicide!

By: stanley003 - Magician Level 5 1-8 10:44

This one is better.

Suppose A kills B's father, and B kills A, how should B be sentenced.

A killed B's father" i.e. the crime was completed. Any subsequent violation of A's personal rights shall not be justified in self-defense.

B killed A again, guilty of intentional homicide.

A suspended death sentence or the death penalty will be imposed.

However, those who voluntarily turn themselves in may be given a lighter or commuted punishment.

Intentional homicide, no salvation.

Summary. Article 234 of the Criminal Law: Whoever intentionally injures the body of another person shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, short-term detention or controlled release.

Whoever commits the crime in the preceding paragraph, causing serious injury, is to be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years; Whoever causes death or seriously injures a person by especially cruel means, causing serious disability, is to be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years, life imprisonment, or death. Where this Law provides otherwise, follow those provisions.

The above is the relevant sentencing provisions for intentional homicide with a knife in China's laws and regulations related to homicide sentencing, and it can be seen that the crime of intentional homicide is sentenced to more than 10 years imprisonment, life imprisonment or death.

A killed C with B's knife, does B need to be responsible.

Please wait patiently for 2 minutes, we are sorting out, and we will answer you immediately, and please do not end the consultation.

Article 234 of the Criminal Law: Whoever intentionally injures the body of another person shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, short-term detention or controlled release. Whoever commits the crime in the preceding paragraph, causing serious injury, is to be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years; Whoever causes death or seriously injures a person by especially cruel means, causing serious disability, is to be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years, life imprisonment, or death.

Where this Law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. The above is the relevant sentencing provisions for intentional homicide with a knife in China's laws and regulations related to homicide sentencing, and it can be seen that the crime of intentional homicide is sentenced to more than 10 years imprisonment, life imprisonment or death.

In this case, A kills C with B's knife, and if B is innocent without knowing it, B is also guilty if B instigates, instructs, etc.

Summary. Hello dear.

It should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

If B knowingly lent a knife to A to commit a criminal act, he is responsible. If B does not know, the knife is stolen by a, and the crime is not responsible.

A killed C with B's knife, does B need to be responsible.

Hello dear. It should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, and if B knowingly lent a knife to A to commit a criminal act, he would be responsible. If B does not know, the knife is stolen by a, and the crime is not responsible.

Does that b need to pay compensation.

If there is responsibility, there is criminal responsibility, and if there is no responsibility, there is no need to pay compensation. But there must be evidence that it has nothing to do with B.

If A is injured by a fall from a height on a bonsai of B's family, but B does not know about it, whether compensation is required or not.

Dear, this is to be compensated.

Can that reduce the amount of compensation?

Whether B knew it or not, it was caused by B's negligence and should be compensated.

How to compensate is how to negotiate and settle according to the condition of the injury.

Okay, thank you, but I heard from my classmate that there is a case where A hit C while riding B's electric car, and B lost money in the end, why is this, if B didn't know beforehand, would he have to lose money?

Can you tell us all about the relationship or situation?

In this case, if B does not lend A a means of transportation, A will not hit someone, so B is jointly and severally liable.

Summary. Hello, I am a legal advice lawyer.

A asks B to kill himself, and finally B agrees to A's request and kills A, is A breaking the law?

Hello, I am a legal advice lawyer.

Article 232 of China's Chi Xiao Criminal Law stipulates: Whoever intentionally kills a person shall be sentenced to death, life imprisonment or fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years; where the circumstances are relatively minor, the sentence is between three and ten years imprisonment.

I'm glad to answer for you, and if you're happy with my needle round burial sexual response, you can give me a thumbs up. And click on my avatar to consult, and wait for the next time to solve your problems.

aCommitted the offences of attempted homicide and intentional homicide.

Those who attempt to kill shall be sentenced. However, a lighter punishment shall be given in comparison with the minimum sentencing standard for the crime of intentional homicide (i.e., completion).

The specific application of sentencing standards is to be determined by the judicial organs on the basis of specific circumstances.

The Criminal Law stipulates that the punishment for the crime of intentional homicide shall be the death penalty, life imprisonment or fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years for intentional homicide; where the circumstances are more minor, the sentence is between three and ten years imprisonment.

The Criminal Law stipulates the principle of punishment for attempted crimes: If a crime has already been committed and the crime is not carried out due to reasons other than the will of the criminal, it is an attempt to commit a crime.

For attempted offenders, the punishment may be mitigated or commuted by comparison with the completed offenses.

The object violated by the crime of intentional homicide is the right to life of another person. Life in law refers to a living organism that can breathe independently and can metabolize, which is a prerequisite for human existence.

Objective elements. Intentional homicide.

First of all, there must be an act of depriving another person of his life, and both acts and omissions can be constituted. The crime of homicide, committed by omission, can only be constituted by those who have a specific duty to prevent the death of another person from occurring.

Secondly, the act of depriving another person of his life must be illegal, that is, in violation of the laws of the country. The execution of the death penalty, justifiable defense, and emergency avoidance do not constitute the crime of intentional homicide (because there are very few cases in which emergency avoidance does not constitute the crime of intentional homicide, it is usually necessary to avoid danger + make meritorious service before it may not constitute a crime). The deprivation of the victim's life with his or her consent also constitutes the crime of intentional homicide.

The so-called "euthanasia" should still be punished as the crime of intentional homicide, and of course, the provisions of mitigating or mitigating may be applied to sentencing.

Third, the completed and indirect intentional homicide crimes require the death of the victim as an element, but only when it is ascertained that there is a causal relationship between the perpetrator's harmful conduct and the result of the victim's death can the perpetrator be found guilty.

The crime of intentional homicide, although it is not intentional homicide, is that he has the crime of intentional homicide.

In this case, if B is killed, it is the crime of intentional homicide, even if it is inadvertently killed, this should be the crime of manslaughter, so it is a crime, and you must pay attention to it.

At this time a is guilty of homicide, which is manslaughter, but it is also homicide

If this is the case, then A is also guilty of manslaughter. But his cause is very bad and should be punished severely.

Regardless of whether it is wrongful homicide or not, A is an intentional murderer, but he just killed the wrong person, and it is also a capital crime.

Whether unintentional or intentional, a subjective attempt to kill a person objectively leads to the death of a person, which also constitutes the crime of intentional homicide.

The person unlawfully deprived another person of his life also constitutes the crime of intentional homicide.

I remember that it seems to be called xian ke Chinese characters I can't remember It's this one: CrimeBroker (1993) Gold Medal Queen You said there should be a prison speech there, Xinqin is broken is not.

That's a little too much. Minor injuries, minor injuries, major injuries, and death will all be punished differently.

b If yes. Minor injuries self-regulate.

Minor injuries B was sentenced to less than 3 years.

Serious Injury Intentional Injury.

Death for intentional homicide.

If a wants to justify self-defense. The only thing is that two things have to happen at the same time and in the same place, and the parents are seriously injured or more.

A's parents were wounded or killed by B, and A, when A's knowledge of the incident, beat B's to death or wound, and A's sin was the same as in the case of B.

The situation is more complicated when A's parents are injured or killed by B, and A fights back at the scene and kills or injures B.

If the parent is seriously injured in the above cases, no matter what the situation of B is. a, it is possible that the justifiable defense will succeed.

Parents are seriously injured or below, and b serious injuries depend on the specific situation. bDeath must be overly defensive. If it's overly defensive, then it's hard to say.

There are standards for the above minor injuries, minor injuries, and major injuries. Not by feeling.

Excessive self-defense, or negligent death, or intentional wounding causing death, or intentional homicide. It's all possible. It depends on the degree of motivation and behavior.

1 Wounding should be intentional to injure people Killing is deliberate** Because it was learned afterwards.

2 Wounding is also intentional wounding Killing is intentional homicide Because a parent is killed, a retaliates against B, so intentional homicide.

Anyway, there is no legitimate defense.

If A's parents were not there when they were beaten, but B was hit again as the title said "after I learned", then A does not exist.

The issue of self-defense is the crime of intentional injury. The severity of the offence depends on whether or not the death or injury of the b.

The first question: a guilty of intentional homicide or intentional injury.

The second question: A is at least justifiable defense, and if justifiable defense is carried out within reasonable limits, then A is not guilty. If A exceeds the necessary limit, then it is excessive defense.

The constituted crimes may be intentional homicide, negligence causing death, intentional injury, negligence causing serious injury.

aIt should be that the defense is excessive, resulting in death.

Justifiable defense Because A's intention was to kill B, B was forced to kill B by mistake, which constituted justifiable defense.

Why not defensive provocation? Because B did not have the intention of provoking the Lord, nor did he have the intention of killing A.

Why isn't it over-defensive? Because A's actions are to kill B, not to frighten B, but to move in earnest.