Opinion-related difficulties related to severe injuries of the facial and cerebral parts of the skull resulting from punching

Aim: Comparison of injuries to the facial and cerebral parts of the skull causing death and grievous bodily harm, resulting solely from punches to the facial area of the skull. Assessment and confrontation of both groups in terms of the final criminal-legal classification of the perpetrator’s acts. Review of reasons for court judgements with a focus on the subjective elements of the prohibited act. Attempt to verify the hypothesis assuming that death or grievous bodily harm can be caused by a single punch to the facial part of the skull. Material and methods: Final judgements passed by criminal divisions of common courts of law in cases where death or grievous bodily harm was caused by injuries to the facial and cerebral parts of the skull resulting solely from punches to the facial area of the skull. Assessment of individual cases within each group to determine similarities and differences. Comparative analysis of both groups. Results: The cause of death in cases involving injuries to the facial part of the skull was rapid suffocation following blood aspiration into the respiratory tract. However, the criminal-legal classification of the perpetrators’ actions in these cases was varied. In one case, death resulted from injuries to the cerebral part of the skull, which are extremely rare as a result of a punch to the facial area within the skull. Grievous bodily harm was due to the loss of vision in the eye, typically due to eyeball rupture. Conclusions: Even though the circumstances of the injuries were similar, different mechanisms were responsible for causing death and grievous bodily harm in the victims. The most severe consequences (death and grievous bodily harm) were not caused by injuries of the same type in any of the cases studied. A single punch to the facial part of the skull may be enough to lead to either grievous bodily harm or death, but the criminal-legal assessment of punching to the face can vary greatly.

Dzieje opiniowania sądowo-lekarskiego w Królestwie Prus w XVIII stuleciu

The history of medicolegal opinions in the Kingdom of Prussia in the 18th century The article presents the history and the course of medicolegal opinions in the Kingdom of Prussia in the 18th century. The activities of the first institutions dealing with matters in the field of public medicine in the country, including medico-forensics, are described. The article presents the activities of universities and medical faculties, pioneering research by eminent professors of medicine, as well as the most important legal regulations concerning medicolegal judgments. The issue of the participation of expert doctors in court proceedings in order to resolve issues related to the assessment of health and life was discussed. Medicolegal opinions in Prussia developed very dynamically in the 18th century (especially compared to other European countries), and its tradition dates back to the times of Lex Carolina from 1532 and Lex Bambergiana from 1508.

Nie wszyscy ludzie lubelskiego Zakładu Medycyny Sądowej (1978-1984)

W Lublinie, w 1979 r., w dniach 20–22.09.1979 miał miejsce VI Krajowy Zjazd Polskiego Towarzystwa Medycyny Sądowej i Kryminologii, na który został zaproszony prof. Axel Simon (kierownik Zakładu Medycyny Sądowej Uniwersytetu im Martina Lutra w Halle – była Niemiecka Republika Demokratyczna), który pierwszy opisał cechy zażyciowego zawiśnięcia w pętli, w postaci wylewów krwawych umiejscowionych na przednich powierzchniach krążków międzykręgowych piersiowego i lędźwiowego odcinka kręgosłupa. W tym samym roku, od 1 lutego pracę rozpoczął Marek Gąsior, który jako ekspert z zakresu medycyny sądowej, zasłynął na arenie międzynarodowej.