Research on Death Resulting from Hit-and-Run in Secondary Collisions

Abstract

In judicial practice, “secondary collision” cases following a hit-and-run traffic accident often face dual difficulties in determining causation and subjective culpability. This paper argues that in most instances, the first perpetrator’s flight creates the risk of the victim being run over again, and the subsequent vehicle’s intervention does not break the causal chain, unless the later driver harbors an intent to kill or the victim has already been moved to a relatively safe area. The adequate causation theory is difficult to apply due to the vague standard of “adequacy” regarding subjective culpability, the mixed culpability theory should be adopted, meaning that for the aggravated consequence of “causing death by fleeing” the perpetrator’s mental state should exclude direct intent and be limited to indirect intent and negligence. The mixed culpability theory helps avoid double counting of harm, reconciles sentencing disparities between the crime of traffic offenses and intentional homicide, and provides a clear, workable approach for judicial practice.