A comparative approach to the police and judicial challenges of the doctrine of transferred malice

The doctrine of intentional transference, which is the product of the British and American legal systems and in Iranian criminal law is related to concepts such as intentional error and identity in crimes, recognizes the intentional nature of the crime in assuming error in the victim. , Confuses judicial officers and judicial authorities. Given the salient challenge of the current doctrine in terms of its judicial and police implications, this article has been written with the aim of examining some of the most important limitations of this theory. This challenge reflects the doctrine's extreme insistence on the imaginary hypothesis. The transfer of intent and non-necessity of proving criminal malice in the event of a crime against the victim is accidental. The results of the study indicate that a single criminal intent that created multiple and sometimes "unintended" consequences can not lead to the unfair development of the scope of the psychological element of the crime and the resulting criminal liability. Face a variety of challenges that will result in violations of the principles and standards of fair trial.