【latest news! The police report that the stolen peanuts have been recovered and the suspect has been arrested] In response to the case of the theft of toxic peanuts, on the 9th, Sichuan Zigong@side beach public security reported that the suspect Zhang has been arrested and brought to justice after full investigation and detection. , All the stolen items have been recovered, and the case is under further investigation. On March 8, a resident of Zigong, Jiang Mou, reported that the battery of his battery tricycle parked in the open-air parking space of Huayu Elementary School in Yantan New City was stolen. Two packs of peanuts soaked in rat poison used for poison rats under the battery car seat were also stolen. The police then issued an emergency alert.
The coastal public security issued an emergency alert, saying that at 9 am on March 8, Jiang Mou, a resident of our jurisdiction, reported that the battery of the battery tricycle parked in the open-air parking space of Huayu Elementary School in Yantan New City was stolen. According to the reporter, it was reported. Two small packets (about half a catty each) of peanuts soaked in rat poison under the seat cushion of the battery car were also stolen.

At present, the public security organs are working hard. The general public is requested to actively provide clues, do not eat the stolen peanuts and submit them to the public security organs as soon as possible. At the same time, the perpetrator was warned not to eat the peanuts and immediately went to the public security organ to surrender.


By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
8 months ago

The owner of this case does not need to bear any responsibility, because the hypothetical thing did not happen. Judging from the currently known news, the poisonous peanuts are nothing but vain, and it is true that the battery is lost. What this incident tells us is that there is no unsolvable case, and it depends on whether the case will have a major social impact or social harm. So is the owner counted as a false report? This is not enough. After all, losing the battery is a fact. It is just a proper exaggeration. It is enough to criticize and educate.

8 months ago

Individuals tend to be irresponsible, neither criminal nor civil. The reason is simple. The perpetrator had no fault at all in this case, and he could not foresee the consequences of death. Although the laws and regulations stipulate that rat poison cannot be bought and sold at will, the perpetrator soaked rat poison in peanuts, not to poison others or harm the society. He did not put the poisonous peanuts at will, but placed it under the cushion. This means that he has fulfilled his basic duty of care and protection. Subjectively, he was also against the theft of the battery car, and some people were eating peanuts. The battery car was stolen and someone ate peanuts. There is no causal relationship with him. You cannot be held accountable based on the results because of poisoning or death. This requires too much of the perpetrator, which is difficult for a strong man. Please note that in law, under the cushion is a privacy space. Private space is a space that is completely exclusive to citizens, and no one can illegally interfere or invade. Even if a search is required, the competent authority must apply for and show a search warrant before the search can be carried out. Otherwise, no one has the right to search without authorization. Some answers mentioned that the car owner did not put a warning label on peanuts. But he did not pay attention to the temporal and spatial characteristics of privacy space. Placing toxic and hazardous materials in a private space generally does not cause danger to others, so no warning is required. Otherwise, it would be too harsh on the citizens. Someone hasn’t ordered kitchen knives, pesticides, cockroach medicine or anything, and hasn’t seen anyone put warning labels on these things. It is illogical and illogical. However, if the scene is changed, the car owner loses the two packs of peanuts in a public place, and there is no warning that the peanuts are poisonous, and the peanuts may be held accountable after being eaten. If the thief in question eats peanuts by mistake, he not only violated the owner’s property rights, but also violated the owner’s right to privacy. It is simply a joke to protect the thief’s personal rights when he has such serious crimes, human rights violations, and subjective faults. With the realization of all people out of poverty, in our country, it is already history that there is no food. In daily education, there is a golden rule, that is, do not eat food of unknown origin. I believe everyone has been educated in this way by their parents. That being the case, why would anyone dare to eat peanuts of unknown origin? After eating peanuts poisoned and died, the owner must be held accountable. What is the reason? I think there is no such reason in the whole world. In addition, the owner immediately called the police to report the poisonous peanuts to the police. In this case, the owner can be regarded as a good Chinese person. Shouldn’t bear any legal responsibility. Of course, I also know that he still has the possibility of taking responsibility in practice, mainly due to two logics: 1. Stable logic. In such cases, if no one is behind the scenes, the victim’s family may encourage trouble and cause instability. 2. Social security logic. Due to imperfect social security, if the perpetrator does not take responsibility, then the victim’s family may have nowhere to live. However, these two logics are completely wrong. It is not possible to assign social responsibility to the individual, but to forcibly impose a crime or responsibility on him.

8 months ago

Navigating the sea depends on the helmsman, and answering battery car questions depends on the leader. For problems related to battery cars, we must first pay tribute to the founder of the classic quotation “It is impossible to work part-time”-Pi Guevara. This thief is also really interesting. To steal the battery is to steal the battery. Why did he even take two packs of peanuts by the way? A pound of peanuts is not a small target, it also affects the speed of escape, monitoring is easier to identify, and it is also a major confusing behavior for humans. The teacher adapted this question into a case analysis, following the ideas of Teacher Guo, chatting with everyone, and chatting about some of the issues. 1. What crimes constitute the perpetrator? “Theft!” I heard many netizens shouting from the screen. There is nothing wrong with this charge, but it needs to be noted that there is a requirement for the crime of theft. If the value of the battery car and peanuts is several hundred yuan, it may be used. Not up to the criminal law. However, if this thief steals as many times as Che Guevara, he is a habitual offender. Then once the amount is added up to the amount of conviction, the sentence can still be sentenced. Secondly, the “crime of negligence endangering public safety by dangerous means” is also possible. If the thief has a friend who runs a snack bar after stealing the peanuts, the thief will give the peanuts to the shopkeeper. As a result, more than a dozen people will be poisoned and sent to the hospital, causing casualties. Then, the crime can also be considered. However, in view of the abuse of “crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means” as a pocket crime, “crime of negligence causing serious injury” or “crime of negligence causing death” can also be considered. 2. If the perpetrator consumes the above-mentioned poisoned peanuts and causes serious injury or death, who should bear the legal responsibility? There are two subjects who may bear legal responsibility here: electric car owners and thieves. For electric car owners, what needs to be considered is whether he is at fault in this matter, and whether he has the obligation to mark peanuts as poisonous. According to the police notice, the car owner put the poisoned peanuts under the seat of the electric car. Can such behavior be regarded as fulfilling a reasonable duty of care? Some people think it counts. The law cannot prohibit citizens from carrying such “toxic substances” to the streets, but it requires that corresponding supporting measures must be taken. The owner did not put the peanuts on the pedals or handles, which are easily taken away by others, but locked them under the seat cushions. Can’t ask the victim to also consider the life safety of the thief? Of course, there are also opinions that do not count. They have put forward higher demands on car owners. When car owners go out with toxic substances, they have to foresee the possibility of being stolen. Otherwise, they should be held liable if damage occurs. According to the “objective imputation theory,” the behavior of the car owner creates a risk that the law does not allow. Because this risk is realized and the result occurs, the car owner will naturally be unable to escape the blame. Let’s look at the thief again. The thief is much more interesting here. If it is the thief who was poisoned by his own consumption, then according to the previous discussion, there are two results: the car owner takes the responsibility or treats it as an accident and takes it for himself. If it is a thief who takes it to someone else to eat, causing serious injury or death to a third party. At this time, it depends on the thief’s subjective mentality. If the thief and his enemy, peanuts, boil wine and discuss heroes and compete for the title of “King of the Battery” on the street, the thief wanted to use the poisoned alcohol to poison the opponent, but the medicine he bought was fake, and he ended up poisoning the opponent. It’s stolen peanuts. Then we still have to convict “intentional homicide.” Because the thief wants to kill subjectively, and objectively the person is dead, but he has a wrong understanding of the cause and effect of the death result, so it still constitutes a crime. If the thief’s subjective mentality is at fault, causing serious injury or death to a third person. So, I think the thief should be convicted and punished as a negligent crime. 3. Conclusion These days, the fund industry has been screaming. I am thinking about this old man who steals the battery. Will he be harvested too badly? He wants to vent and vent, so he will steal the battery car. But I have to say, be cautious about stealing, don’t pick peanuts on the side of the road. Update: According to media reports, the suspect has been brought to justice, and the owner lied that peanuts were poisonous in order to speed up the police to solve the case. This kind of harassment operation is also very common. For example, you have stolen thousands of necklaces on the bus, but you lied to the police that you were robbed and exaggerated the value of the necklace. The response of the police will be improved to a certain extent. However, this method is not recommended, because some things are exaggerated and there are still certain risks. In short, peanuts are not poisonous.

Last edited 8 months ago by sina156
8 months ago

The owner only lost the battery car, and there were no toxic peanuts under the cushion, which has been criticized and educated. I believe everyone knows why the lie. You are not the only one who lost the battery car. Do you have to find every one you lose? But poisoned peanuts are different. Going back to the problem itself, I don’t think it should be held responsible. Peanuts mixed with poison are essentially used to poison mice, not to poison car thieves. The country has not banned rat poison from circulating in the market, and there is nothing wrong with this practice. Poisonous peanuts are placed under the cushions, and not completely placed in public places. Most people do not steal or eat poisonous peanuts. The car owner did not intend that the battery car and the poisoned peanuts were stolen, and he did not intend to kill others by poisoning. After being lost, he can report to the police and inform the peanuts that the peanuts are poisonous. All consequences should be borne by the car stealer.

8 months ago

No responsibility. If poisonous peanuts exist, the possibility that poisonous peanuts stored in a confined space will cause harm is extremely low. The owner cannot anticipate and has no obligation to anticipate the theft of poisoned peanuts. If the poisoned peanut does not exist, then the owner is even less responsible. Investigation resources can be allocated according to the needs of the masses (reporting cases), and it is still a common understanding at this stage. Although this understanding may not be correct, many people have formed this understanding, which is closely related to Guo Jia’s propaganda. Unlike countries such as Japan, the United States, and the United Kingdom, China has made it clear that different types of cases will be handled by different departments and invest different amounts of investigation resources. Slightly exaggerating the lost property so that one’s own case can get more resources than normal is not an act of obstructing the order of social management. Even if the owner’s behavior has caused some negative effects, it should be responsible for the existence that caused everyone to misunderstand.

8 months ago

Hey, this car owner is really talented! My family used to lose motorcycles, electric cars, etc. After calling the police, there was no news. (Those who have been stolen must all feel the same way) This matter let me know that it is not because our local police have insufficient capacity. , I really can’t find the people’s battery car, but this case is really not urgent enough to attract attention. To get back to the point, if this poisonous peanut is unfortunately eaten by someone who is unlucky, it has nothing to do with the owner of the car. Because the owner’s small battery was stolen first, the use of this poisonous peanut was unpredictable and uncontrollable. Secondly, the owner of the car has notified the matter at the first time and fulfilled the corresponding duty of care. However, the owner of this car is really short-sighted, and he did not hesitate to provide false information in order to attract the attention of the police, without expecting the consequences. There was nothing wrong with him, but now he probably has to go in and eat food in the detention center for a few days. If I were the owner of the car, I would buy rat poison and peanuts to make poisoned peanuts on the night of the call. In this case, even if the police come to the door in the future, I might have a sophistry, right hh

8 months ago

Not invited. Because this topic is completely within my range. The basic principle of the law is: to be honest, not to harm others, and to give everyone what he deserves. ——Justinian On March 8, a Zigong resident Jiang Mou reported that the battery of his battery tricycle parked in the open-air parking space of Huayu Primary School in Yantan New City was stolen. Two packs of peanuts soaked in rat poison used for poison rats under the battery car seat were also stolen. At present, in the case of the theft of toxic peanuts, the coastal public security reported that after full investigation work, the suspect Zhang has been arrested and brought to justice. All the stolen items have been recovered and the case is under further investigation. It’s not uncommon for battery cars to be stolen in life. I believe that some friends have also experienced battery cars being stolen. Everyone hates this kind of theft. It can even be said to be a hatred of “grenching teeth”. Then in this article, battery cars were stolen. The robbery involved the “poisonous peanuts” soaked in rat poison, which also aroused everyone’s discussion. If the poisoned peanuts are eaten, should the car owner take responsibility? Everyone has different opinions, and the author also has his own opinions on this. If there are any inadequacies, I hope to correct them. 1. How do you view the emergency alert issued by the police that “poisoned peanuts and batteries were stolen”? According to the current situation, if the thief steals the battery car and takes the poisoned peanuts at the same time, and the other party does not know that the peanuts are soaked in rat poison, whether it is eaten by himself or by others, it will be harmful to others. There are real dangers to life and health, and there is even the possibility of endangering public safety. For the stolen “poisonous peanuts” incidents of unspecified objects with real dangers, the public security organs will issue emergency prompts in time. On the one hand, they are to remind the thief not to swallow them by mistake. Go to the public security organ to surrender in time. On the other hand, it also reminds the masses of the people not to eat “peanuts” of unknown origin to prevent accidental consumption of “poisonous peanuts”, which has played a certain reminder and preventive protection for personal life safety and public safety. The role of. 2. If the “poisonous peanuts” are eaten, should the car owner take responsibility? In fact, netizens also have many opinions on this issue. The main points of dispute are whether the car owner has the obligation to mark peanuts as poisonous, whether he has performed his duty of care, whether he is at fault, and the opinions on the disputed point are different, and the results obtained are different. Some people think that the law cannot prohibit the perpetrator from carrying toxic and harmful substances similar to “poisonous peanuts”, but they must be marked while carrying them, and they must do their due obligation to remind others to pay attention. In the incidents involved in this article, the car owner will be poisonous. The peanuts are locked under the seat of the battery car. According to the general social perception, they have fulfilled their obligation to prevent others from being damaged. You can’t ask the owner to take into account whether the battery car will be stolen and whether it will be stolen after it is stolen. In this case, even if the poisoned peanuts cause damage to others objectively, the vehicle is subjectively not deliberate or negligent, and the damage result cannot be predicted in advance. Therefore, even if the damage result occurs, it should be determined. For accidents, the owner is not responsible for this. Another view is that a higher duty of care should be imposed on car owners. Car owners should foresee that their battery car may be stolen. Even if they lock the “poisonous peanut” under the battery car seat, it may cause the thief or others to eat by mistake. , The obligation to remind or mark the situation, but in the incident involved in this article, the owner of the car did not perform a higher duty of care, if the consequences of damage occur, the owner is at least negligent and should be held liable. The author agrees more with the first point of view, whether or not to be responsible must adhere to the principle of unity of subjective and objective, neither subjectively attributable to blame, nor objectively attributable to responsibility. Of course, in the current case report, the public security organs have arrested the criminal suspect, and the “poisoned peanuts” did not cause damage to others. Objectively, there is no actual harm result. Naturally, it is impossible to say whether the responsibility is to be assumed or not. 3. Criminal liability of the thief Article 264 of the Criminal Law [Theft], theft of public or private property in a relatively large amount, or multiple thefts, theft in the house, theft with a weapon, or pickpocketing shall be sentenced to three years The following fixed-term imprisonment, criminal detention, or surveillance shall be punished concurrently or solely with a fine; if the amount is huge or there are other serious circumstances, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than 10 years, and shall be fined; if the amount is particularly huge or there are other particularly serious circumstances, a penalty Fixed-term imprisonment of more than ten years or life imprisonment, and fines or confiscation of property. “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases of Theft” Article 1 The value of theft of public and private properties is 1,000 to 3,000 yuan, 30,000 to 100,000 yuan, and 300,000 yuan to If the amount is more than 500,000 yuan, it shall be deemed as “large amount”, “large amount” and “extraordinarily huge amount” as stipulated in Article 264 of the Criminal Law. The higher people’s courts and people’s procuratorates of all provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government may, based on the economic development status of the region and the social security status, determine the specific amount standard for implementation in the region within the amount range specified in the preceding paragraph, and report it to the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Court. Approved by the procuratorate. There is no doubt that in the incidents involved in this article, under normal circumstances, the value of the battery car is more than one thousand, so the suspect in this case may be involved in criminal responsibility and violate the criminal law of theft. A gentleman loves money and gets it in a good way. In today’s social economy, there are actually many occupations and jobs that can be done. As long as they are willing to put in their own efforts, are willing to learn, and support themselves, it is still possible. There is no free lunch in the world. It is impossible to get something for nothing. A momentary impulse choice may lead to a lifetime of regret.

8 months ago

If it’s okay, then it’s okay! If something happens, such as someone who eats peanuts and is poisoned to death, then something is wrong! Because human life is more than everything, more than everything we think is reasonable. For example, why do you want to use drugs that are banned by the country? Tetramethan has been banned from production and sales. How did you get it? Second, what is the purpose of soaking peanuts with poison, to poison mice or cats and dogs? Or a poisonous person? Third, the risk estimate is insufficient. Even if it is not stolen, the poisoned peanut is a poisoned mouse. What if the mouse takes the poisoned peanut elsewhere and a child eats it? Fourth, there is no mark. Don’t not mark it because you made it yourself, know that it is dangerous!

8 months ago

Those who have a battery car at home and no children pay attention. Are you afraid that the electric car will be stolen? It’s very simple. Buy a packet of rat poison, mix it with peanuts, and then write “poisonous peanuts” on the package with a marker, or dye the peanuts directly to make them uneatable at first sight, so that they won’t be eaten after the battery car is lost. Need to lie. And it can prevent thieves from eating it, and it can also be said that the battery car is poisonous peanuts when reporting the crime. I have to get it back 100% for you.

8 months ago

Assuming that Zhang San unfortunately ate poisoned peanuts, the car owner does not need to bear legal responsibility. The owner of the battery car put the poisoned peanuts under the seat of the battery car, not on the road next to the battery car. He has fulfilled his duty of care and did not take the initiative to create an unreasonable risk. It was Zhang San’s theft that exposed him to it. Under the danger of eating poisonous peanuts. Therefore, the owner of the battery has not committed any illegal acts and is naturally irresponsible.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x