Crimes are significant in determining crimes and determining punishments, and are significant in fighting and preventing crimes. Crimes are committed by various methods, often occurring in deserted places, markets, wharves, crowded intersections, etc. Criminals brazenly snatch property and then flee into small alleys and lanes that they are familiar with to escape.
Criminals often use large-displacement motorbikes to approach people who are negligent in managing their assets to commit crimes, endangering other road users and disrupting traffic safety. Criminals even prepare tools such as knives and syringes to use when being chased to escape.
Recently, in Ho Chi Minh City, there have been many daring and serious robberies that have caused anxiety and panic among the people. They are ready to "shoot", risk their lives when the victims resist, and use all kinds of tricks to approach their prey. These are the tricks that robbers in Ho Chi Minh City have used, making many people in this bustling city always feel insecure and afraid when going out. To avoid detection, criminals often wear fake license plates, bend license plates, remove license plates, rent cars... After committing the crime, they quickly find a hiding place in complicated locations and sell the property at pawnshops, large gold and silver trading companies with many people... The methods of operation of criminals are increasingly sophisticated and daring, especially recently there has been a gang of 8 to 10 criminals (including women) riding large motorbikes, when discovering that the victim is wearing a handbag, money on their person, they let 3-4 cars block the victim to stage a traffic accident to make the victim lose their guard so that their accomplices can pickpocket, snatch the victim's handbag from behind and escape. Robbers often target women who are alone at night or in deserted areas. For those who have just withdrawn money from banks, if they see a deserted road ahead or a convenient turn for escape, they will speed up, follow the victim, quickly snatch the bag and escape. If chased, the accomplices behind will block the way, making it difficult for those pursuing. There are cases where the person blocking the way even pretends to ask the victim
to prolong the time and distract the victim from calling for help from passersby.
Another trick they often use is to pretend to be a motorbike taxi driver or waiting for an acquaintance standing at a 3-way or 4-way intersection. When they discover that a passerby has a lot of property, they will follow them to a convenient section of the road and snatch their property. Sometimes they dress up as taxi drivers or hotel security guards to snatch the victim when they are not paying attention.
Maybe you are interested!
-
Discussion on Causes, Limitations and Existing Problems of Short-Term Loan Service Quality Khdn -
Existing Problems, Limitations and Shortcomings in the Trial of Road Traffic Safety Violations in Quang Ngai Province and Their Causes -
Practical Application, Problems, Limitations and Causes -
Some Difficulties and Problems Existing in Legal Regulations -
Problems and Inadequacies in Applying Marriage Prohibition Regulations
For gangs that commit property robbery, they often follow people who carry valuable, easy-to-sell assets (such as mobile phones, cameras, jewelry, handbags, gold, money, etc.), especially customers who come to withdraw money, gold at banks, transaction points, gold shops, etc. The criminals' modus operandi is very bold, determined, regardless of any danger to the lives and health of others. The common characteristic of these groups is using compact, high-speed vehicles with fake license plates on the streets, detecting the victim's vulnerability, immediately approaching to commit the crime, quickly escaping from the scene, when being chased, they are ready to use weapons (such as: knives, swords, support tools, etc.) to fight back.
The modus operandi of the robbers is to use the assets of customers who receive money at banks, credit points, transactions, money exchange, gold, foreign currency in large quantities, and transport assets on the road. The informant (De lo) often dresses politely like a businessman to enter the banks, go to the transaction counter (they also make ATM cards, exchange foreign currency... but with small values to avoid the attention of people around) to probe, search for people who transact, receive money in large quantities, then call outside to notify his accomplices. The people waiting outside dress politely, often come and sit, stand and wait for unknown purposes, when they see the person receiving money in the bank coming out, they approach them themselves; use new cars, including cars used for direct robbery, the engine must be good, run fast, and have safe brakes (like xwSport; Drem don zen with a twisted cylinder...). They assign a "driver" (to drive the car); The robbers and their cars were blocking the way. When they received the signal (phone) from the "Lottery" guy inside, informing them about the characteristics, clothes, bag, and amount of money of the person withdrawing money, they
When approaching and following the person carrying and transporting money and assets to convenient locations (there are no people ahead, there is a turn) convenient for escape, they immediately increase the speed to close in on the target, snatch the bag containing the money and escape. When being chased, there is a vehicle of the subject in the group running behind with the task of "blocking the ground" causing obstacles and difficulties for the pursuer.
For example : The case of Tran Khanh Toan borrowing his sister's motorbike to go to a birthday party. When he reached Le Van Sy bridge, Toan removed the motorbike's license plate and wandered on the road. When he reached Ky Dong street, Toan discovered Phuong sitting behind Thu's motorbike with a handbag. Toan followed Thu and Phuong to the intersection. Taking advantage of the two women stopping their motorbikes to wait for the green light, Toan approached and snatched Phuong's handbag.
- Regarding the victim and the property stolen:
A very typical feature of the crime of property snatching is that the victims are mostly women. Women are the target of property snatchers because women often use valuable jewelry, handbags, etc., which are lightweight assets. They often have many loopholes in property management, and are often off guard. On the other hand, women's reactions to property snatching are often panic, slow to react, and unable to chase, making it easy for criminals to escape. Most victims of property snatching do not have a previous relationship with the perpetrator, and the situation leading to the crime is very quick and sudden. In addition, there is also a part of the reason due to people's low awareness of protecting property, many people on the street still wear valuable jewelry, carry handbags on their shoulders, use mobile phones on the street, etc., becoming victims of criminals.
2.3. SHORTCOMINGS AND LIMITATIONS IN THE APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS ON THE CRIME OF STEALING PROPERTY IN THE CRIMINAL CODE IN HO CHI MINH CITY AND THEIR CAUSES
2.3.1. Existing problems and limitations in resolving cases of property robbery
Investigation : The rate of investigation of cases of property robbery is only about 50%. Thus, about 50% of property robbery cases have not been investigated and clarified. In addition, there are some hidden crimes such as cases of property robbery.
The assets have not been counted and investigated, so there are still many people who are at large outside the law, causing a mentality of contempt for law enforcement agencies and they continue to commit crimes. The work of receiving reports and denunciations of crimes at the Ward and Commune Police still has many shortcomings: slow reception of information, inaccurate recording, sometimes even omission of reports and denunciations... There is also a situation of hiding cases because of achievements, thereby significantly affecting the results of investigations of property robbery cases.
Most of the investigated cases are still heavily administrative, slow and lack close coordination between professional detective measures and investigative work. The situation of purely investigative work is still common, stating that it is very simple when collecting evidence, evaluating evidence, and from there, orienting the investigation is still limited. Most of the robberies occur in public places, complex locations, and the traces left by criminals are very few. If the investigators do not know how to exploit documents, the investigation will be difficult. The work of expanding the investigation of cases that have been investigated and clarified is still limited, and the investigation cannot conclude all the criminal acts of the criminals.
Investigation and prosecution work : During the investigation phase, prosecutors focus on reviewing the case files but are not really sharp in the content of the case in order to orient the investigation and coordinate the investigation of criminal acts. In most cases of property robbery, the Procuracy does not participate from the beginning, only when there is an arrest or prosecution of the case, then the Procuracy participates. The Procuracy almost does not really participate throughout the investigation process but only supervises some evidence collection activities such as scene investigation, confrontation, search... or in particularly serious cases. This leads to a situation where many additional files are returned, and the fight against property robbery crimes is not timely. The approval or cancellation of preventive measures by the investigation agency is still administrative in nature, often lacking in timeliness, hindering the investigation. Many cases of property robbery are brought to court for prosecution late. The level of prosecutors is often not high enough to ensure the debate in court. The proposed penalties for crimes are not uniform, the same crime but the proposed penalties are different.
The Court's trial of property robbery cases also has limitations such as:
Firstly, the determination of crimes is still inconsistent. Determination of crimes is a very important issue in the process of resolving criminal cases. This is the premise for the differentiation of criminal responsibilities and the individualization of punishment in a fair and accurate manner. “ The wrong determination of crimes will lead to very serious consequences, especially the failure to ensure the basis of the punishment imposed, the wrong person is tried for the right crime, and the wrong law .”
The practice of criminal trials shows that the prosecuting agencies still encounter many difficulties and obstacles in determining the crime. These obstacles mainly arise in cases where the criminal acts of the accused do not clearly and specifically demonstrate the elements constituting the crime. The criminal's behavior has many different elements of different crimes, such as the criminal's behavior has both the element of deceit but also the element of quickness and openness, or the criminal act is both open and has the element of quick escape... For cases falling into these categories, it is required that the prosecuting agencies have a basic and solid theoretical level, based on the assessment, analysis, and synthesis of each element of the case, and the correct application of relevant legal documents in order to determine the correct crime.
For example: Hoang Van Hoang was born in 1984. Because he wanted to have money to spend, Hoang had the idea of appropriating other people's property. Hoang noticed that teacher Chau often went home from school on Truong Chinh street, so on August 4, 2008, he pretended to be a student, dressed politely, and took Ms. Chau's car to hitchhike. Ms. Chau saw that Hoang was a decent person, so she trusted him and let Hoang drive. When passing through a deserted street, Hoang pretended to drop his hat and stopped his car to ask Ms. Chau to pick it up. When Ms. Chau got out of her car and went to the hat, Hoang sped away on Ms. Chau's motorbike. Seeing this, Ms. Chau shouted "robbery, robbery". Hoang drove a short distance before being surrounded and caught by motorbike taxi drivers on the side of the road.
There are three opinions on the content of the above case as follows:
- The first opinion is that Hoang committed the crime of openly appropriating property as prescribed in Article 137 of the 1999 Penal Code.
- The second opinion is that Hoang committed the crime of robbery as prescribed in Article 136 of the 1999 Penal Code.
- The third opinion is that Hoang committed the crime of fraud to appropriate property as prescribed in Article 139 of the 1999 Penal Code.
In my opinion, Hoang's behavior does not violate the Crime of open appropriation of property as prescribed in Article 137 of the 1999 Penal Code because:
According to the provisions of Clause 1, Article 137 of the 1999 Penal Code, "Anyone who openly appropriates another person's property worth from five hundred thousand dong to less than fifty million dong... shall be sentenced to imprisonment from six months to three years."
Although the Law does not describe the crime of open appropriation of property, judicial practice shows that the crime of open appropriation of property is when the offender appropriates another person's property in a condition where the property manager or property owner does not have the conditions to protect his or her property or prevent the offender from appropriating the property.
The act of openly appropriating property includes the following characteristics: (1) The act of appropriating property by the offender is committed when the property manager or owner, due to objective circumstances, cannot protect his/her property or cannot prevent the act of appropriating property by the offender; (2) The offender commits the act of appropriating property openly; (3) After appropriating the property, the offender does not need to quickly escape.
Compared with the case of Hoang Van Hoang, Hoang's case does not satisfy the first element (1) which is "the act of appropriating property by the offender is committed when the property manager or owner of the property, due to objective circumstances, cannot protect his property or cannot prevent the act of appropriating property by the offender ". Ms. Chau could not prevent Hoang's act of appropriating the motorbike because Hoang created that condition, not because of objective circumstances. On the other hand, although she knew that Hoang had appropriated
The robbery that Ms. Chau could not protect her property because the motorbike was moving at high speed. Therefore, Hoang's behavior does not satisfy the crime of open appropriation of property as prescribed in Article 137 of the 1999 Penal Code.
H's behavior also does not constitute the crime of "fraudulent appropriation of property" as prescribed in Article 139 of the 1999 Penal Code, because:
According to Clause 1, Article 139 of the 1999 Penal Code, “Anyone who, by fraudulent means, appropriates another person’s property worth from five hundred thousand dong to less than fifty million dong… shall be subject to non-custodial reform for up to three years or imprisonment from six months to three years.” Similar to other crimes of property infringement of an appropriative nature, the act of appropriating property is an indispensable sign of the crime of fraudulent appropriation of property. In this crime, the offender has used fraudulent means to appropriate another person’s property. Specifically: (1) The offender has committed fraudulent acts such as by words, actions or other means to provide false information about the incident (lying, being untrue, saying nothing as something, saying little as much, erasing numbers to get more); (2) The owner or manager of the property mistakenly believed in such untrue information and voluntarily transferred ownership or management rights of the property to the offender. Satisfying these two elements constitutes the crime of fraud and appropriation of property.
Although according to the above case, before committing the act of appropriating property (the motorbike) of Ms. Chau, Hoang had committed deceitful acts such as pretending to be a student to ask for a ride, pretending to drop her hat so that Ms. Chau could get off the motorbike to pick it up, taking the opportunity to easily appropriate the motorbike, these were just tricks that Hoang used to easily access the property and create favorable conditions for easy appropriation, it was not that Ms. Chau voluntarily handed over the motorbike to Hoang. This is an extremely important factor in convicting Hoang. According to the Crime of Fraudulent Appropriation of Property, it is specifically stipulated that "anyone who uses deceitful tricks to appropriate another person's property...", meaning that the offender can only appropriate property when using deceitful tricks and only using deceitful tricks can appropriate property. And especially in the Crime of Fraudulent Appropriation of Property, usually after the offender has appropriated
After a certain period of time, the property manager discovered that he had been deceived. In the case of Hoang Van Hoang, Hoang only deceived Ms. Chau to easily access Ms. Chau's motorbike and create a loophole between Ms. Chau and the motorbike; here, Ms. Chau did not transfer the motorbike to Hoang at all, nor did she transfer the right to manage the motorbike to Hoang, but only let Hoang temporarily drive the motorbike when Ms. Chau was nearby (under the control and management of Ms. Chau's motorbike) and took advantage of the time when driving the motorbike as well as when Ms. Chau got out of the motorbike to pick up her hat, Hoang openly appropriated the motorbike and quickly escaped. Therefore, this case lacks the second element (2) in the objective aspect of the crime of fraud, which is "The owner or property manager mistakenly believed in the untrue information of the offender, so he voluntarily transferred the ownership or management of the property to the offender ".
If it is assumed that, before committing the act of appropriating property, the offender had deceived the property owner, then the crime of "fraudulent appropriation of property" is not convincing. Therefore, Hoang's behavior does not satisfy the crime of frauduous appropriation of property as prescribed in Article 139 of the 1999 Penal Code.
In my opinion, the trial of Hoang Van Hoang for robbery is well-founded.
Clause 1, Article 136 of the 1999 Penal Code stipulates: "Anyone who snatches another person's property shall be subject to imprisonment from one to five years."
Normally, the crime of snatching property is often expressed through objective acts such as snatching, grabbing property under the control of others and then quickly escaping. For example: the act of snatching a watch, snatching a gold chain, snatching a handbag, snatching a cell phone... if in those cases there is resistance from the property owner, there is also the act of snatching and then quickly escaping. And these acts clearly demonstrate the crime of snatching property.
But in practice, the criminal's objective behavior is very diverse and complex. In order to appropriate the property of others, the criminal prepares to commit the crime as well as carries out the crime.