NOT PUNISHABLE TO CONDUCT THE EXERCISE OF A RIGHT Of those with a slap knocks over a NAZI HAT EMBLEMS. Comment on a case 437/2009 Court of Lancaster.
The Single-Judge of the Court of Lancaster, Dr. Francis Marine, has issued an interesting ruling in data29.9.09-06.10.2009. The prosecution charged he saw four young anti-fascists Abruzzo, assisted by lawyer. Malandra I. De Caro E. and Di Bucchianico, Ricucci, for crimes of domestic violence (art. 610 cp) in the competition because "forcing the XXXX YYYYY Yes to remove the hat he wore, depicting the eagle and the Celtic cross, with the threat consisted of ' surrounded, girandogli around, looked so provocative in pointing to the hat and offer him the opportunity, Otherwise, to suffer the consequences very damaging to his person. In San Vito Chietino on 07/26/2005).
The facts as emerged during the trial were as follows: on the evening of 7/26/2005 was under way in S. Vito Chietino the celebration of "National Alliance" and the young militant delpartito Mr. XXXX YYYY was in the venue wearing a hat with a visor that reported the effigy of the eagle with the cross cweltica. At one point came to the same three or four young supporters of the same country "Refoundation Communist who began to ask with insistence to take off her hat and give it to them. The Gioan, intimidated, took off his hat but he refused deliver it to defendants and looked in the direction where he had his uncle for help. They came and asked what was going on. The four political antagonists of XXX YYY said they did not want the ivy as a symbol of the Celtic cross against the Nazis. Interjected another close friend of XXX YYY who took the hat and lopose on the head and one of the youths charged with a slap tried unsuccessfully to topple the cappello.Ne began a heated discussion between members of two opposing political factions, the erao groups which increased in number, without that. Fortunately we came to blows.
The judge noted that the opposition was made for political reasons largely related to the free expression of thought Article protected by our Constitution. 21. However, the conduct of the four numerical abundance and tone of the expressions used: "if you do not take your hat off ends badly" has certainly created a coarctation of the will of the victim who is to configure the material elements of the crime of domestic violence. This place should be noted that the coarctation is parted into being in the light of conduct put in place the victim in itself constituting a crime. In fact, the ostentatious symbols on the hat worn by XXXX YYYY, that the eagle and the Celtic cross, were (and still are) used by right-wing parties and movements in Italy and Europe inspired by the tragic events of fascism and Nazism and commonly recognizable and identifiable as such. These are symbols that, unenforceable well-known feature iconological organizations, associations, groups, collecting the "traditional" culture of Nazism and fascism, cultivate among its aims of incitement to violence and discrimination on racial, ethnic, national or religious establishment which, therefore, is forbidden by Italian law (Article III c 3 L n.654 of 1975). It also Article 2 of D. Decree n.122 of 1993 (called Mancino Law) punishes as a crime the display of emblems or symbols of the movements and groups referred to in Article 3III c. L. 654/75 at public meetings, the applicant in this case assumptions (feast party). Thus the compulsion put in place by today's defendants, conducted in the manner reported by the person not particularly aggressive offense, they believe that they can then proportionate to the fact, can be justified by the purpose of preventing the commission of a crime by the XXXX YYYY.
The ruling under review offers an interesting reconstruction of exonerating the exercise of a right and a fulfillment of a duty to correctly reconstruct the conditions for the application of exonerating in question: such as having made a crime in order to exercise its right, the proportionality between the conduct that took place and the right and exercised the right violated, and the line judge frentano refers to a ruling by the Supreme Court which ruled that: "In determining whether or not the crime of domestic violence, coercion must be justified not only when one the justifications provided for in Articles. 51-54 cp but also when the violence or threat is used to prevent or stay the execution of a crime ... But .. even when coercion was scent to prevent the commission of a crime can not be separated by a criterion of proportionality between the means adopted and the crime that was intended to prevent "(Cass. Pen sect. V 7.6.1988 No 5423).
Chieti-Bologna March 15, 2010
Chambers. Isidoro Malandra
Chambers. Elia De Caro (Bologna Retelegale)
0 comments:
Post a Comment