Évf. 3 szám 4 (2006)

Megjelent October 1, 2006

issue.tableOfContents661ae581a59bf

Tanulmányok

  • A téves ténymegállapítás egyes pszichológiai aspektusai
    Megtekintések száma:
    129

    Psychology plays a main role in the criminal procedure. The psychological methods started being used only in the 19th century. During the legal proceedings the autorities must deal with people. The behavior of the people is very different. The authorities must know the basic rules of the psichology to understand the accused people and witneses. The human memory has a lot of regularity. The knowledge of these regularities make easier the efforts of the authorities to get the truts. The importance of the pschichological knowledge in the legal occupation is unquestional. Overbearing police methods creat too high risk of false confession and are not likely to yield factually reliable information from the accused. A significant number of confessions that result in wrongful convictions are obtained through coercive questioning. This paper examines false confessions and discusses the psychological and social factors that influence the verdict in criminal procedure and how often do false confessions lead to miscarriages of justice. In determining the admissibility of confession evidence, the courts have to considere factors such as mental abuse in addition to physical force and threats.

    142
  • A társadalomra veszélyességben való tévedés gyakorlati jelentősége a gazdasági bűncselekmények kapcsán
    Megtekintések száma:
    30

    In this study I examined the error, one of the grounds for the preclusion and termination of punishability. Grounds for the preclusion of punishability and grounds for the termination of punishability, mean that punishability shall be precluded. Error, as an obstacle of the preclusion of punishability, doesn’t happened as usually as other grounds for the preclusion of punishability, for example: insane mental state, constraint and menace. The error means- 27. §- the perpetrator shall not be punishable for a fact, of which he was not aware on perpetration. The person, who commits an act in the erroneous hypothesis that it is not dangerous for society and who has reasonable ground for this hypothesis, shall not be punishable. Error shall not exclude punishability, if it is caused by negligence, and the law also punishes perpetration deriving from negligence. I examined how often the judge accept an error, if the person commit a crime, for example: tax fraud, practise usury, bribe somebody. Is it exceptional or not? When can the perpetrator of a crime refer to error? What examine judge?

    102
  • Néhány észrevétel a pénzmosás tényállásához
    Megtekintések száma:
    28

    Absztrakt nélkül.

    42

Hallgatói tanulmányok