Przekroczenie granic obrony koniecznej w wyniku strachu lub wzburzenia usprawiedliwionych okolicznościami zamachu z art. 25 § 3 k.k. z perspektywy psychologicznej

Abstract

The analysis of the statutory grounds for necessary defence under Article 25 § 3 of the Criminal Code, in particular fear or agitation, must use the achievements of psychological and medical sciences in the field of psychiatry, because a criminal case is not about the conduct of a “model citizen”, but a specific person having individual characteristics of responding to a state of emergency, cognitive and motivational functions, temperament, ability to cope with the situation under situational stress, individual mechanisms of self-control, genetic conditions affecting the ways of responding to an emergency and the “psychological life position” linking the past and future with the event concerned, which is necessary for in-depth psychological analyses. It is only interdisciplinary cooperation in the fields of law, psychology and psychiatry that makes it possible to adequately approach the grounds under Article 25 § 3 of the Criminal Code. This cooperation has its legal basis in Article 193 § 1 and Article 202 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in terms of taking evidence under an opinion of expert forensic psychiatrists and psychologists, as in such cases the finding of circumstances relevant to the resolution of the case requires special expertise. Comprehensive psychiatric and psychological opinions should set standards for evidence-taking in cases under Article 25 § 3 of the Criminal Code.