306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation in relation to a specific person. Theory of everything

1. The operative part of the acquittal must contain:

1) last name, first name and patronymic of the defendant;

2) the decision to find the defendant innocent and the grounds for his acquittal;

3) the decision to cancel the preventive measure, if it was chosen;

4) a decision to cancel measures to ensure confiscation of property, as well as measures to ensure compensation for harm, if such measures were taken;

5) an explanation of the procedure for compensation for damage associated with criminal prosecution.

2. When rendering an acquittal, issuing a resolution or ruling to terminate a criminal case on the grounds provided for in paragraph 1 of part one of Article 24 and paragraph 1 of part one of Article 27 of this Code, the court shall refuse to satisfy the civil claim. In other cases, the court leaves the civil claim without consideration. Leaving a civil claim without consideration by the court does not prevent its subsequent filing and consideration in civil proceedings.

3. In the event of an acquittal, decision or ruling to terminate criminal prosecution on the basis provided for in paragraph 1 of part one of Article 27 of this Code, as well as in other cases when the person to be brought as an accused has not been identified, the court decides the issue of forwarding to the head of the investigative body or the head of the body of inquiry of the criminal case for production preliminary investigation and identifying the person to be charged as an accused.

Commentary to Art. 306 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation

1. The decision to acquit the defendant, which forms the basis of both the operative part and the entire acquittal, must contain not only the surname, first name, patronymic of the defendant and the keyword(decision) “to acquit”, but also the exact legal wording of the charge preceding this word on which he is acquitted (for example, on a charge of intentionally inflicting grievous bodily harm, resulting in the death of the victim through negligence, i.e. in a crime provided for in part four of article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), as well as the basis for justification - failure to establish the event of the crime; absence of corpus delicti in the defendant’s act; failure to prove the defendant's participation in the commission of a crime.

2. An indication of the specific basis for the acquittal of the defendant is essential from the point of view of the interests of this person. Despite the fact that acquittal on any basis means the judicial rehabilitation of the defendant and in this sense they are absolutely equivalent, in a certain respect all three circumstances are different. An acquittal based on the absence of a crime is preferable because an acquittal due to the absence of a crime leaves the possibility of property recovery in a civil lawsuit.

3. Equally important It also has a clear indication in the operative part of the acquittal on which specific charge the defendant is acquitted. The presence of a verdict on the same charge (both indictment and acquittal) that has entered into legal force serves as a circumstance excluding proceedings in a new criminal case: such a case cannot be initiated, and the case initiated is subject to termination.

4. In relation to an acquitted person, neither a preventive measure nor the seizure of property taken in order to ensure the possible confiscation of the property of the convicted person can continue to apply. They are subject to cancellation, which must be indicated in the operative part of the acquittal. A lien placed on property to secure a civil claim must also be lifted, although there may be civil grounds for damages. Not a single coercive measure taken in a criminal case can remain in effect after the completion of the criminal process with the rehabilitation of the defendant.

5. Part three of the commented article provides the only case when, based on the results of consideration of a criminal case on its merits, it can be sent for additional investigation. This occurs if the defendant is acquitted due to his non-involvement in the commission of the crime. The crime, the fact of which has been established, remains unsolved. A criminal case is sent by the criminal prosecution body to identify the person who committed the crime and bring him to criminal responsibility. At the same time, the wording contained here, according to which the same motion is received in a criminal case “also in other cases when the person to be brought as an accused has not been identified,” cannot be deciphered. It is impossible to explain who was tried by the court for an unsolved crime.

1. The operative part of the acquittal must contain:
1) last name, first name and patronymic of the defendant;
2) the decision to find the defendant innocent and the grounds for his acquittal;
3) the decision to cancel the preventive measure, if it was chosen;
4) a decision to cancel measures to ensure confiscation of property, as well as measures to ensure compensation for harm, if such measures were taken;
5) an explanation of the procedure for compensation for damage associated with criminal prosecution.

3. In the event of an acquittal, decision or ruling to terminate criminal prosecution on the basis provided for in paragraph 1 of part one of Article 27 of this Code, as well as in other cases when the person to be brought as an accused has not been identified, the court decides the issue of forwarding to the head of the investigative body or the head of the body of inquiry of the criminal case to conduct a preliminary investigation and identify the person to be brought in as an accused.

Commentary on Article 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation

1. The operative part of the acquittal should indicate which of the provided by law grounds, the defendant is acquitted under each article (point, part of the article) of the criminal law.

2. The operative part of the acquittal must also contain instructions on the abolition of the preventive measure, measures to ensure the execution of the sentence in terms of a civil claim, other property penalties or possible confiscation of property specified in Part 1 of Art. 104.1 of the Criminal Code, and other court decisions that, in accordance with the law, are subject to reflection in this part of the sentence.

3. The legislator instructs the court, if the acquittal is rendered due to the absence of a crime or the defendant’s non-involvement in the commission of a crime, to refuse to satisfy the civil claim. This rule is mandatory to follow in all situations without exception. In other cases, the civil claim remains without consideration.

________________
Right there. - P.160.

4. A type of absence of corpus delicti is the presence of one of the circumstances excluding the criminality of the act. In the case of necessary defense or extreme necessity, causing harm during the detention of a person who has committed a crime, or physical (mental) coercion, reasonable risk, execution of an order or instruction, the person does not bear criminal liability. Meanwhile, the same cannot be said about civil legal liability.

5. A civil claim for compensation for damage caused in a state of necessary defense must be refused, of course, if its limits were not exceeded (Article 1066 of the Civil Code).

6. But damage caused as a result of actions in a state of extreme necessity must be compensated by the person who caused the damage. This is the basic rule, although the legislator has provided for the possibility:
1) imposing the obligation to compensate for damage on the person in whose interests the person who caused the harm acted;
2) full or partial exemption from compensation for damage to both entities (Article 1067 of the Civil Code).

7. Neither the criminal procedure nor the civil procedure law says anything specific about civil liability caused by causing harm during the detention of a person who committed a crime, or physical (mental) coercion, reasonable risk, execution of an order or instruction. It seems that the rules of Art. 1067 of the Civil Code, that is, those that relate to the institution of extreme necessity. It is not appropriate to prohibit damages under such circumstances. In criminal proceedings, the court leaves this civil claim without consideration.

Do you think you are Russian? Were you born in the USSR and think that you are Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian? No. This is wrong.

Are you actually Russian, Ukrainian or Belarusian? But do you think that you are a Jew?

Game? Wrong word. The right word"imprinting".

The newborn associates himself with those facial features that he observes immediately after birth. This natural mechanism is characteristic of most living creatures with vision.

Newborns in the USSR saw their mother for a minimum of feeding time during the first few days, and most time we saw the faces of the maternity hospital staff. By a strange coincidence, they were (and still are) mostly Jewish. The technique is wild in its essence and effectiveness.

Throughout your childhood, you wondered why you lived surrounded by strangers. The rare Jews on your way could do whatever they wanted with you, because you were drawn to them, and pushed others away. Yes, even now they can.

You cannot fix this - imprinting is one-time and for life. It’s difficult to understand; the instinct took shape when you were still very far from being able to formulate it. From that moment, no words or details were preserved. Only facial features remained in the depths of memory. Those traits that you consider to be your own.

1 comment

System and observer

Let's define a system as an object whose existence is beyond doubt.

An observer of a system is an object that is not part of the system it observes, that is, it determines its existence through factors independent of the system.

The observer, from the point of view of the system, is a source of chaos - both control actions and the consequences of observational measurements that do not have a cause-and-effect relationship with the system.

An internal observer is an object potentially accessible to the system in relation to which inversion of observation and control channels is possible.

An external observer is an object, even potentially unattainable for the system, located beyond the system’s event horizon (spatial and temporal).

Hypothesis No. 1. All-seeing eye

Let's assume that our universe is a system and it has an external observer. Then observational measurements can occur, for example, using " gravitational radiation"penetrating the universe from all sides from the outside. The cross section of the capture of “gravitational radiation” is proportional to the mass of the object, and the projection of the “shadow” from this capture onto another object is perceived as an attractive force. It will be proportional to the product of the masses of the objects and inversely proportional to the distance between them, which determines the density of the “shadow”.

The capture of “gravitational radiation” by an object increases its chaos and is perceived by us as the passage of time. An object opaque to “gravitational radiation”, the capture cross section of which is larger than its geometric size, looks like a black hole inside the universe.

Hypothesis No. 2. Inner Observer

It is possible that our universe is observing itself. For example, using pairs of quantum entangled particles separated in space as standards. Then the space between them is saturated with the probability of the existence of the process that generated these particles, reaching maximum density at the intersection of the trajectories of these particles. The existence of these particles also means that there is no capture cross section on the trajectories of objects that is large enough to absorb these particles. The remaining assumptions remain the same as for the first hypothesis, except:

Time flow

An outside observation of an object approaching the event horizon of a black hole, if the determining factor of time in the universe is an “external observer”, will slow down exactly twice - the shadow from the black hole will block exactly half possible trajectories"gravitational radiation". If the determining factor is “ internal observer", then the shadow will block the entire trajectory of interaction and the flow of time for an object falling into a black hole will completely stop for a view from the side.

It is also possible that these hypotheses can be combined in one proportion or another.

1. The operative part of the acquittal must contain:

1) last name, first name and patronymic of the defendant;

2) the decision to find the defendant innocent and the grounds for his acquittal;

3) the decision to cancel the preventive measure, if it was chosen;

4) a decision to cancel measures to ensure confiscation of property, as well as measures to ensure compensation for harm, if such measures were taken;

5) an explanation of the procedure for compensation for damage associated with criminal prosecution.

3. In the event of an acquittal, decision or ruling to terminate criminal prosecution on the basis provided for in paragraph 1 of part one of Article 27 of this Code, as well as in other cases when the person to be brought as an accused has not been identified, the court decides the issue of forwarding to the head of the investigative body or the head of the body of inquiry of the criminal case to conduct a preliminary investigation and identify the person to be brought in as an accused.

Commentary on Article 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

1. The operative part of the acquittal must contain the formulation of the grounds for acquittal under each article (clause, part of the article) of the criminal law under which the defendant is acquitted. When passing a verdict of acquittal against a person accused of committing several crimes qualified by one article (item, part of the article) of the criminal law (for example, several thefts or episodes of a continuing crime), when the grounds for acquittal for them are different, the operative part of the verdict should clearly indicate , on which of the grounds provided by law and of which crimes the defendant is acquitted. In cases in which several defendants are accused at once, one verdict may be passed, which convicts some defendants and acquits others. The operative part of the acquittal must also contain instructions on the abolition of the preventive measure, measures to secure a civil claim or confiscation of property and other court decisions, which, in accordance with the law, must be reflected in this part of the sentence.

2. In relation to a civil claim when an acquittal is made, only two possible solutions are possible: refusal to satisfy the claim or leaving it without consideration. If acquitted due to the absence of a crime or due to the defendant’s non-involvement in committing a crime, the court refuses to satisfy the civil claim, because the actions of the defendant did not cause any harm to the civil plaintiff. According to part two com. Article in all other cases, a civil claim is left by the court without consideration, since, for example, the absence of elements of a crime in a person’s act does not mean that there are no grounds for compensation for harm on the basis of civil law. At the same time, according to the literal meaning of this norm, in the event of an acquittal based on the acquittal verdict of a jury (clause 4, part 2, article 302), the civil claim, as it may seem at first glance, should always be left without consideration. The fact is that the jury answers three main questions (Part 1 of Article 339): a) has it been proven that the act took place (possible answer: “it has not been proven that the act took place”); b) whether it has been proven that the defendant committed this act (possible answer: “it has not been proven that the defendant committed the act”); c) whether the defendant is guilty of committing this act (possible answer: “not guilty”). As you can see, the wording of these questions, and therefore the content of the acquittal verdict containing the answers to them, does not outwardly coincide with the wording of the grounds specified in paragraphs 1 - 2 of Part 1 of Art. 302, as well as in paragraph 1 of part 1 of Art. 24 and paragraph 1, part 1, art. 27, - “the event of the crime has not been established”, and “the person is not involved in the commission of the crime”. However, the first two grounds that may be contained in the acquittal verdict of the jury, although formulated differently, are nevertheless virtually identical, respectively - the failure to establish the event of the crime and the non-involvement of the defendant in the commission of the crime, therefore, when issuing an acquittal based on such a verdict, the judge must refuse to satisfy the claim. If the jury's verdict is that the defendant is not guilty of committing the charged act, the judge leaves the civil claim without consideration, since the term "not guilty" in this context means that the defendant, in the opinion of the jury, committed the act, but did it innocently, i.e. .e. without intent or through negligence. However, in civil law the concept of guilt differs significantly from criminal law (Part. 1), including such signs as showing care and prudence, which were required from a person in these conditions, and taking all measures for the proper fulfillment of the obligation. Therefore, what is not negligence in criminal law may appear as such in civil law. In addition, in civil law, in a number of cases liability without fault is allowed (harm caused by a source of increased danger, etc.). Thus, if the defendant is acquitted in a jury trial on the basis of “not guilty,” the plaintiff retains the chance to recover damages in civil proceedings.

3. Termination of the criminal case on the grounds of clause 1, part 1, art. 24 and paragraph 1, part 1, art. 27, referred to in part 2 of this article, is the termination of the case by the court in trial if the prosecutor refuses to support the prosecution on these grounds (Part 7 of Article 246, Article 249). In these cases, the court also refuses to satisfy the civil claim.

1) last name, first name and patronymic of the defendant;

2) the decision to find the defendant innocent and the grounds for his acquittal;

3) the decision to cancel the preventive measure, if it was chosen;

4) a decision to cancel measures to ensure confiscation of property, as well as measures to ensure compensation for harm, if such measures were taken;

5) an explanation of the procedure for compensation for damage associated with criminal prosecution.

When rendering an acquittal, issuing a resolution or ruling to terminate a criminal case on the grounds provided for in paragraph 1 of part one of Article 24 and paragraph 1 of part one of Article 27 of this Code, the court shall refuse to satisfy the civil claim. In other cases, the court leaves the civil claim without consideration. Leaving a civil claim without consideration by the court does not prevent its subsequent filing and consideration in civil proceedings.
In the event of an acquittal, ruling or ruling to terminate criminal prosecution on the basis provided for in paragraph 1 of part one of Article 27 of this Code, as well as in other cases when the person to be brought as an accused has not been identified, the court decides on the issue of sending the investigative body or the head of the body of inquiry of a criminal case to conduct a preliminary investigation and identify the person to be brought in as an accused.

(Part three was introduced by Federal Law No. 92-FZ of July 4, 2003, as amended. Federal Law dated 06/05/2007 N 87-FZ)

Commentary on Article 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation

The decision to acquit the defendant, which forms the basis of both the operative part and the entire acquittal, must contain not only the last name, first name, patronymic of the defendant and the key word (decision) “to acquit” itself, but also the exact legal formulation of the charge against which he acquitted (for example, on charges of intentionally causing grievous bodily harm, resulting in the death of the victim through negligence, i.e., a crime provided for in part four of Article 111 of the Criminal Code), and the basis for acquittal is failure to establish the event of the crime; absence of corpus delicti in the defendant’s act; failure to prove the defendant's participation in the commission of a crime.
An indication of the specific basis for the acquittal of the defendant is essential from the point of view of the interests of this person. Despite the fact that acquittal on any basis means the judicial rehabilitation of the defendant and in this sense they are absolutely equivalent, in a certain respect all three circumstances are different. An acquittal based on the absence of a crime is preferable because an acquittal due to the absence of a crime leaves the possibility of property recovery in a civil lawsuit.
Equally important is a clear indication in the operative part of the acquittal on which specific charge the defendant is acquitted. The presence of a verdict on the same charge (both indictment and acquittal) that has entered into legal force serves as a circumstance excluding proceedings in a new criminal case: such a case cannot be initiated, and the case initiated is subject to termination.
In relation to the acquitted person, neither the preventive measure nor the seizure of property taken in order to ensure the possible confiscation of the property of the convicted person can continue to apply. They are subject to cancellation, which must be indicated in the operative part of the acquittal. A lien placed on property to secure a civil claim must also be lifted, although there may be civil grounds for damages. Not a single coercive measure taken in a criminal case can remain in effect after the completion of the criminal process with the rehabilitation of the defendant.
Part of the third commented article provides for the only case when, based on the results of consideration of a criminal case on its merits, it can be sent for additional investigation. This occurs if the defendant is acquitted due to his non-involvement in the commission of the crime. The crime, the fact of which has been established, remains unsolved. A criminal case is sent by the criminal prosecution body to identify the person who committed the crime and bring him to criminal responsibility. At the same time, the wording contained here, according to which the same motion is received in a criminal case “also in other cases when the person to be brought as an accused has not been identified,” cannot be deciphered. It is impossible to explain who was tried by the court for an unsolved crime.