Беспомощность потерпевшего: теоретические воззрения и правоприменительная практика (Д.Ж. Гостькова, журнал "Правоприменение", том 7, N 2, апрель-июнь 2023 г.)

Гостькова Д.Ж. Беспомощность потерпевшего: теоретические воззрения и правоприменительная практика

Д.Ж. Гостькова - кандидат юридических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры уголовного и уголовно-исполнительного права, криминологии, Южно-Уральский государственный университет (национальный исследовательский университет)

Исследуются различные авторские подходы к содержанию дефиниции "беспомощность потерпевшего" как уголовно-правовой категории. Соотносятся понятия "бессознательное состояние" и "беспомощное состояние потерпевшего", с изложением аргументов сторонников и противников расширительного толкования термина "беспомощность". Отдельно рассматриваются критерии беспомощности: физическое и психическое состояние. Излагается позиция Верховного Суда РФ по перечисленным вопросам. Делается вывод, что для разрешения существующих разногласий необходимо выработать единой подход, основанный на определении основания усиления степени общественной опасности преступного деяния, совершенного в отношении беспомощного потерпевшего.

Ключевые слова: беспомощность, беспомощное состояние, тяжелобольной, физическая беспомощность, психическая беспомощность, бессознательное состояние, потерпевший, обстоятельство, отягчающее наказание

Gostkova D.Zh. The helplessness of the victim: theoretical views and law enforcement practice. Pravoprimenenie

D.Zh. Gostkova - PhD in Law, Associate Professor; Associate Professor, Department of Criminal and Penal Law, Criminology South Ural State University

The subject of the study is the helplessness of the victim as a criminal legal category. The purpose of the research is to confirm the hypothesis about the negative impact of the evaluative nature of the sign "helpless state of the victim" on the unity of law practice. The historical and legal method allows us to consider doctrinal views and case law of applying norms containing the helpless state of the victim in different historic periods; using the comparative legal method, differences in the interpretation of the victim's helpless in different criminal laws are revealed; the formal legal method allows us to explore the technique of legislative recognition of the helpless state of the victim as constructive, qualifying signs and aggravating circumstances; logical methods contribute to the generalization of the results of the analysis of case law.

The main results. It is established that the existing definitions of the helpless state of the victim, as a rule, are based on the objective inability of the person to actively resist. Based on the various reasons that cause the helpless of the victim, the following types are distinguished: physical and mental. Two categories of persons are recognized as physically helpless: those who are unable to resist due to internal factors (state of health) and external (related persons). The list of diseases that form physical helplessness is open. However, the court, as a rule, refers to disability or difficulties in movement. It is important when imputing physical helplessness to establish the fact that the victim was in such a state before the start of the committing of the criminal intent. Otherwise, it forms the objective side of the crime. The court, when determining mental helplessness, mainly focuses on the expert opinion. A controversial issue in the doctrine of criminal law remains the attribution of unconsciousness to helpless state in crimes against life and health. The Court takes the position of not attributing. In this case, it seems illogical to recognizea bound person as helpless.In order to maintain the unity of practice, a critical analysis of the approaches existing in the theory of criminal law, the grounds for strengthening criminal responsibility for a crime against a helpless person, has been carried out. These include: method, protection of socially poorly protected groups, peculiar ferocity, provoking factor, cynicism. Taking into account the specifics of crimes against sexual freedom and sexual inviolability and against life and health, it seems more logical to formulate different grounds for them: as a way of committing a crime and as protection of socially poorly protected groups, respectively.

Conclusions. The hypothesis about the lack of unity in doctrine and law enforcement practice regarding the content of the "helpless state" sign of the victim was confirmed. It should be noted that the existing discussion is largely due to the ambiguous position of the Russian Supreme Court. In order to resolve the existing contradictions, it is proposed to determine the fundamental point: the basis for strengthening criminal responsibility.

Keywords: helplessness, helpless state, seriously ill, physical helplessness, mental helplessness, unconsciousness, victim, aggravating circumstance