Main tasks and practical skills:
- “To use other dangerous tricks, means or weapons”
- “Weapon” is one of the weapons as prescribed in Item 1 of Article 1 of the Regulation on Management of weapons, explosive materials and supportive tools (promulgated with Decree No.47/1996/ND-CP dated 12 August 1996 of the Government);
- “Dangerous means” is a tool or an instrument for ordinary human use, commercially or domestically, or an item made by the offender to serve as a means for the offence or an item available in nature and the offender possesses it, and the use of such tool, instrument or item for attacking others shall be dangerous to the victim’s health or life.
+ For tools and instruments
For example: machetes, kinds of sharp and acute knives, ect.
+ For an item made by the offender
For example: a sharpened iron bar, a wooden cudgel, etc.
+ For an item available in nature
For example: a brick, a stone, an iron bar, etc.
- “Dangerous trick” means one of the tricks used in cases where dangerous means or weapons are used to conduct the robbery, the offender may use other dangerous tricks on the victim or others, such as using sleeping or anaesthetic pills with a big dose that may do harm to the victim’s health or life; poisoning the victim; confining the victim in a place that may be a danger to their health or life; stretching a rope across the road for the victim to fall down while they are riding motorbike, in order to steal the property, etc.
- The Judge should consider any injury or damage caused to the victim’s health: if the injury rate is from 11% to less than 30%, Point dd of Item 2 of Article 133 of the Penal Code shall apply; if the rate is from 31% to less than 6%, Point a of Item 3 of such article shall apply, and if the rate is from 61% and more or causing death, Point a of Item 4 of such article shall apply.
- Noting that: the injury rate must be based on the results of examination of a specialist organization. Without the conclusion on examination of such specialist body, the injury rate cannot be determined, and the above facts of aggravation shall not apply.
- “Value of robbed property”
- The Judge should determine the correct value of the robbed property for applying the correct punishment framework;
- In order to determine the correct value of the robbed property, the Judge should base their assessment on Part II of Inter-Circular No. 02/2001. However, where the offender said that the victim had not stated the correct value of the robbed property, this means there exists a dispute in respect of the value of the property, the Judge shall determine the value of the property as follows:
+ The value of the robbed property is determined according to the market price of such property at the locality at the time when the property is obtained;
+ Where there are sufficient grounds for proving that the offender attempts to steal the property which has a specific value to their subjective awareness, such specific value shall be considered as a basis for determining the offence. For example: A sees a person receiving 100 million dongs from the bank and putting the money into their bag. A follows the person, and taking advantage of the surrounding deserted street, A uses strength to rob the money but is arrested. A, however, only robs the bag with an amount of 200 thousand dongs, due to the fact that 100 million dongs has been kept in another place by the person. Although the robbed money is only 200 thousand dongs, A is prosecuted and heard pursuant to Point e of Item 2 of Article 133 of the Penal Code because the property which A attempts to rob is 100 million dongs;
+ Where there are sufficient grounds for proving that the offender attempts to rob the property regardless of its value, the market price of the robbed property at the locality at the time when the property is obtained shall be considered as a basis for determining criminal liability;
+ In order to determine the correct value of the robbed property which has been sold by the offender and unable to seize, the investigating body should collect testimonies of persons who knows well about the property to identify what the property is; what its label is; what the actual price of the property at the locality at the time when the property is robbed is; how much the value of the property remains, etc. and issuing a final conclusion on the robbed property on such basis.
|
