the Plenum of the Supreme court of Russia is preparing a clarification that those convicted of robbery or theft associated with illegal penetration into dwelling, it is necessary to recover compensation for moral damage.
Similar to the legal position laid down in the draft resolution of the Plenum of the rules of civil claims in criminal cases. In these lawsuits, the victims in fact billed to the offender how much he should pay to repair the damage.
the Document emphasizes the Supreme court: criminals should not only return the stolen, but also to pay for the wrongs. How to tell the experts on the practice of compensation for moral damages shall be recovered, not always.
Here is a live example. Once in Khabarovsk in the grocery shop low prices recidivist S. met with an elderly customer. At first he was polite and courteous, offered to help carry the packages to my house.
In the apartment the woman decided to thank the assistant and took a thousand rubles. At this time she fell a nylon stocking with savings of 50 thousand rubles. The man immediately transformed from a gentleman in recidivist. Took the money, beat my grandmother and left. And soon was arrested. He tried to mitigate the court’s history that “the blow he struck the victim unintentionally, to liberate from the grip of the victim.” That is, did not want to beat, she hit the fist.
But the court still considered the actions of the recidivist typical robbery. Summary: citizen convicted and sentenced to 3,6 years of a colony of special regime. In favor of the victim it is collected 50 thousand roubles, that is all that was in the nylon stocking.
by the Way, during the proceedings, the defendant wrote the lady a letter of apology. He was sincerely worried that I came across and wanted to give him as little as possible time. For this he was willing to apologize.The court read the letter as a mitigating circumstance. Because so says the law.
But apologies always look more convincing if in an envelope with a letter of deep and sincere repentance to invest money. If the defendant himself does not guess to do, the court should remind him about it in the sentence. And enter in the operative part of the required amount.
According to Judicial Department at the Supreme court of Russia, during the year under article of the Criminal code “Robbery” was convicted of more than 7.3 thousand people. They inflicted on their victims and even psychological trauma. How much is a shattered faith in people, undermined confidence, a painful sense of insecurity? The courts must take account of these sufferings.
“the Claim about compensation of moral harm subject to review by the court also in cases, when as a result of the crime, the harm caused and the moral rights belong to the victim or intangible benefits (e.g., as a result of robbery, theft, illegal PR��with penetration into dwelling, fraud associated with the disclosure of information about private life),” reads the draft resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme court of Russia.
Intangible benefits is not only life and health but the dignity of the person, inviolability of the home, etc So the burglar not only breaks locks, it just a simple fix. At the same time he destroys something fragile and delicate in the soul of a landlord. How to live with the feeling that your home no longer a fortress? When someone walked through the nest of love and trodden on your carpet, it is possible to survive, but not so easy to accept. Therefore, the thief must not only sit, but also to pay for the wrongs.
“let me Remind you that the Association of lawyers of Russia Commission develops criteria for determining the size of compensation of moral harm”, – said the Chairman of the Association of lawyers of Russia Vladimir Gruzdev. According to him, prepared clarifications of the Plenum of the Supreme court to help the courts to better protect the rights of victims.
“the Adoption of the resolution caused by the backlog of questions about the numerous features and details of production in a civil lawsuit in a criminal case, the lawyer said Vyacheslav guests receive. – Previous explanations adopted during the Soviet era and do not meet current realities. Most of the current explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme court of Russia have practical and useful character.” He also notes that the recognition by the defendant of a civil lawsuit is not an unconditional basis for its satisfaction. In other words, even if the accused does not argue with the presentation of the bill, the court must weigh everything and count.
“This provision is controversial, says the lawyer. – It requires additional justification. I believe this clarification should be supplemented with a provision that the recognition of the claim should be a mitigating circumstance.”
