刑法学（Law Express 法学初阶——西方法学经典教材系列影印双语注释本）（著名法学家江平教授、许章润教授联袂推荐）_(英) 艾奇 (Finch,E.)著，王梓　注_9787560994000

刑法，是法学公法中最为重要的部门法之一，也是法学本科生必修课程。
　　在这本教材中，作者采用简明易懂的语言将其重点知识，如刑事责任的要素，英美法中关于故意与过失的界定，各个重点罪名的详述等内容一一作了介绍与阐释。教材每一章节之始，作者为其内容的重点知识词汇编制了知识网络图，这种最为直观的方式，可以使学生在学习前就对其有一个完整及初步的了解。
　　同时，每一章节还配有相关的案例以及分析，这样可以帮助学生理解相关知识并熟悉司法实践过程，提高运用能力。再有，每一章节还附有部分内容的知识图表，便于学生对所学的知识能够得到及时的总结和梳理。

　　《刑法学》这本教材语言简明易懂，便于老师和学生在短时间内，掌握刑法学的主要内容，并了解英国法是从怎样的角度和思路介绍刑法内容的。教材附录部分的重点词汇，可以使学生很快地理解重点词汇的含义，以扫清阅读和学习障碍。

1 ELEMENTS of CRIMINAL LIAbILITy
　　Problems arise in fixing liability if there is a lapse in time after the actus reus before the mens rea comes into being and， equally， in situations where the mens rea precedes the actus reus。
　　Actus reus occurring before mens rea
　　This means that the defendant completes the prohibited act before he forms the prohibited state of mind。 The scenario in figure 1。1 is an example of this。
　　Two distinct approaches have been used to secure a conviction in situations where the actus reus is complete prior to the formation of mens rea：
　　treating the actus reus as a continuing act （Fagan）（see below）； and，
　　basing liability on failure to act after creating a dangerous situation （miller）（see pages 78）。 ExAm TIP Lack of coincidence is a popular examination topic。 you will need to be able to explain why lack of coincidence is a problem and how the courts have tackled this。 A good grasp of cases such as Fagan， miller and church is important as the facts demonstrate the problems with lack of coincidence and the judgments illustrate the creativity of the judiciary in overcoming this impediment to conviction。 KEy CAsE Fagan v。 Metropolitan Police Commissioner 〔1969〕 1 qB 439 （dC） Concerning： coincidence of actus reus and mens rea Facts
　　The defendant accidentally stopped his car on a policeman’s foot but then refused to move when he realised this。 He appealed against his conviction for assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty on the basis that at the time of the actus reus （when his car made contact with the policeman’s foot） he had no mens rea （because it was accidental） and by the time he formed mens rea （refusing to move） there was no act upon which to base liability （he merely refused to undo that which he had already done）。 Legal principle It was held that the actus reus of assault （in the sense of a battery） came into being when contact was first made between the car and the policeman’s foot。 This actus reus continued for the whole time that the car remained on the foot， only ending when the car was moved。 At the point in time that the defendant became aware of the contact and refused to move， he developed the requisite mens rea and liability was complete。
　　……

我要评论