Case statement
After the above, I pretended to agree, so I said to the gangster, "Brother, this place is not flat enough. Can we choose a flat place?"
The gangster was quite happy. Wang took the gangster to a flat place, and then Wang said to the gangster, "Big Brother, take off your clothes.". The gangster was happier when he heard it, so he quickly took off his clothes. When he took off his clothes, his eyes were covered with clothes. Wang quickly pushed the trend and pushed the gangster into the cesspit.
The gangster tried to climb out. Wang stamped his hand and he fell in. The second time I climbed out, I was stamped and fell in; The third time I climbed out, I was stamped, completely fell in, and finally drowned in the cesspit.
In this case, Li's behavior constitutes attempted rape, which naturally goes without saying. But what do you think this behavior of Wang belongs to? Is it self-defense or self-defense afterwards? Some people say that stepping on the first foot belongs to self-defense, and the second or third foot is called post-defense. What do you think?
Lawyer Popularization: Does Wang's behavior belong to self-defense or self-defense afterwards?
First of all, let's look at the legal definition of "justifiable defense":
According to Article 21 of the Criminal Law, in order to protect the interests of the state, the public, the person, property and other rights of oneself or others from the ongoing unlawful infringement, the act of stopping the unlawful infringement, which causes damage to the unlawful infringer, belongs to justifiable defense and does not bear criminal responsibility.
Let's take a look at the understanding of "ex post facto defense":
Ex post facto defense refers to the fact that the illegal infringement has ended, but the victim still thinks that the illegal infringement still exists and defends, eventually causing damage consequences. If the victim constitutes defense afterwards, he shall bear criminal responsibility.
So is Wang's behavior a self-defense or an after-the-fact defense?
in the above cases, although the unlawful infringement has ended, the defensive behavior after the unlawful infringement is an integrated defensive behavior with the defensive behavior before the end, and it should not be considered as inappropriate defense. If it does not exceed the necessary limit, it should be considered as justifiable defense, and if it exceeds the necessary limit, it should be considered as excessive defense.
in other words, don't cut it into pieces, but look at it together. You can't cut it into three behaviors, but treat it as a whole. From the perspective of the average person beforehand, see if your behavior is natural for the average person.
Put yourself in the position of the victim at that time, and look at the whole defense process rationally from their perspective. Think about it, if it were you, you would push this gangster to the cesspit, and he would climb up, would you step on it? I believe that most people will choose to step on it, and even hit it with a stone, but don't splash feces on yourself when you hit it.
this is actually the average person. Make a holistic judgment and don't be too demanding of defenders. Substitute yourself, open the eyes of ordinary people, not the eyes of saints. Because the gangster may commit violence against Wang again after climbing up, we should regard Li's illegal infringement as not over yet and in progress (integrated illegal infringement).
Therefore, at this time, Wang's act of stepping the gangster into the cesspit with several feet in succession still constitutes justifiable defense. For the death of the gangster, Wang does not have to bear criminal responsibility.