Judgment No. 22903 of February 1, 2023, represents a significant intervention by the Court of Cassation on mitigating circumstances in Italian criminal law. In particular, the decision focuses on the figure of the mitigating circumstance provided for by art. 62, n. 3, of the Penal Code, which concerns the behavior of an individual acting under the suggestion of a rioting crowd. This judgment offers significant food for thought on the nature of the crime and the requirements necessary to establish such a mitigating circumstance.
According to the Court, the mitigating circumstance referred to in Article 62, n. 3, applies when the perpetrator finds themselves in a specific context characterized by an aggregation of people in a state of agitation and collective excitement. But what are the necessary requirements for this mitigating circumstance to be recognized?
Notion - Requirements - Psychological Causal Link - Necessity. The mitigating circumstance of having acted due to the suggestion of a rioting crowd, as per art. 62, n. 3, of the Penal Code, is established when the perpetrator, who did not previously intend to commit the crime, finds themselves in a specific place, among a multitude of people in a widespread state of agitation and collective excitement, and furthermore, a psychological causal link exists between the suggestion deriving from the crowd and the unlawful conduct. (Conf.: n. 10234 of 1988, Rv.179472-01)
This headnote offers a clear definition of how the perpetrator's conduct should be assessed in relation to the criminal event. It is fundamental to note that mob suggestion cannot be a mere pretext to justify unlawful behavior, but must result in a direct link with the conduct being contested.
Judgment No. 22903 of 2023 represents an important clarification on mitigating circumstances in Italian criminal law. It emphasizes the need for a thorough analysis of the circumstances in which the unlawful conduct occurs, highlighting the importance of establishing a psychological causal link between the mob's suggestion and the perpetrator's action. This decision not only enriches Italian jurisprudence but also provides a valuable guideline for the future application of the principle of sentence mitigation in similar cases.