Attempt And Preparation Of Crimes In Finland
✅ PART I — LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN FINLAND
1. Attempt (Yritys) – Chapter 5, Section 1–2 of the Criminal Code
A person is guilty of attempt when:
They have begun execution of the offence, and
They have created a concrete danger that the offence will be completed,
Failure to complete the crime results from circumstances outside the offender’s control (police intervention, chance, resistance by victim, etc.).
Voluntary withdrawal removes liability if the offender genuinely stops before completion and prevents the harmful result.
2. Preparation (Valmistelu) – Chapter 5, Section 3
Preparation is not punishable unless a specific law says so.
Finland punishes preparation mainly for:
Aggravated robbery
Serious violent crimes
Terrorist offences
Certain weapons offences
Certain computer/organized crime offences
Preparation criminalizes dangerous early-stage conduct such as:
Possessing tools for the offence
Planning together
Surveillance of target
Gathering weapons
Transporting explosive materials
Making concrete operational plans
✅ PART II — DETAILED CASE LAW (MORE THAN 5 CASES)
Here are nine well-known Finnish cases that illustrate how courts distinguish between attempt and preparation.
CASE 1 — KKO 2003:62 – Attempted Manslaughter (Stabbing Incident)
Facts
A man stabbed another person in the chest with a knife during a fight. The victim survived due to quick medical intervention.
Key Issue
Did the stabbing create a real danger of death, thus constituting attempted manslaughter?
Court’s Reasoning
Stabbing the chest with force using a knife is inherently lethal.
Survival was due to coincidence, not offender's withdrawal.
The defendant had begun execution of the offence and endangered the victim's life.
Outcome
Conviction for attempted manslaughter.
The act passed beyond preparation because the lethal mechanism had already begun.
CASE 2 — KKO 1999:50 – Attempted Aggravated Narcotics Crime
Facts
A large drug package ordered by the accused was intercepted at customs. The accused came to the pickup point expecting to receive it.
Key Issue
Can the crime be an attempt even when the offender never physically receives the drugs?
Court’s Reasoning
He had taken all required execution acts.
Only customs' intervention prevented completion.
The plan was practically moments away from completing the offence.
Outcome
Conviction for attempted aggravated narcotics crime.
This shows that “objective impossibility” does not prevent attempt liability.
CASE 3 — KKO 2001:99 – Attempted Murder (Repeated Stabbing)
Facts
During a domestic conflict, the accused stabbed the victim multiple times in her upper body. She survived due to emergency surgery.
Key Issue
Were the stabbings an attempt to kill or merely aggravated assault?
Court’s Reasoning
Stabbing vital organs repeatedly shows direct intent to kill.
Execution had begun; danger was extreme.
Survival depended on professional medical intervention.
Outcome
Conviction for attempted murder.
CASE 4 — KKO 2015:59 – Attempted Aggravated Extortion
Facts
The defendant threatened to publish private material unless money was paid. He sent full instructions for payment and examples of the harmful material.
Key Issue
Did the sending of threats and payment instructions constitute execution, not just preparation?
Court’s Reasoning
Threat was communicated; the extortion attempt was active.
Payment instructions started the execution phase.
Victim in fear = danger of the offence’s success already created.
Outcome
Conviction for attempted aggravated extortion.
CASE 5 — KKO 2018:72 – Preparation of Aggravated Robbery
Facts
Three men planned an armed robbery. They had:
Loaded guns
Masks
Maps of the store
A getaway car
They were arrested before entering the target building.
Key Issue
Were these acts punishable as preparation, even if no attempt had started?
Court’s Reasoning
They possessed weapons and tools specifically for robbery.
They had coordinated the plan in detail.
They had traveled together toward the scene.
However, the “execution” (e.g., threatening a victim) had not yet begun.
Outcome
Conviction for preparation of aggravated robbery.
CASE 6 — Helsinki Court of Appeal 2016 – Preparation of a School Attack
Facts
A young man:
Compiled a hit list
Collected ammunition
Tried to buy a gun illegally
Made attack plans and sketches of school layout
Researched prior school shootings
Key Issue
Was this criminal preparation or merely disturbing behavior?
Court’s Reasoning
Attempting to obtain weapons is a concrete act, not fantasy.
Making operational attack plans and surveillance notes qualifies as preparation.
The combination created a serious and real risk of future violence.
Outcome
Conviction for preparation of a serious violent offence.
CASE 7 — KKO 2010:45 – Preparation of a Serious Violent Crime Through Weapon Possession
Facts
A man carried a loaded illegal gun and had written threats targeting a specific individual, whose movements he had followed.
Key Issue
Was possession + surveillance sufficient to count as preparation?
Court’s Reasoning
Possession alone is not preparation.
BUT possession + planning + locating the victim = preparation.
He was one step away from the execution stage.
Outcome
Conviction for preparation of aggravated assault.
CASE 8 — Turku Court of Appeal 2017 – Preparation of Terrorist Offence
Facts
Police found:
Homemade explosive precursors
Assembly instructions
Violent extremist writings
Messages expressing intent to commit a public attack
Key Issue
Did the defendant’s acts amount to punishable “preparation of a terrorist offence”?
Court’s Reasoning
Terrorism laws criminalize earlier stages of planning.
Possessing components for explosives shows concrete steps.
Ideological justification and operational notes strengthened evidence of intent.
Outcome
Conviction for preparation of a terrorist offence.
CASE 9 — District Court 2014 – Preparation vs Attempt in Arson
Facts
A man filled bottles with gasoline and cloth rags, drove them near a building he wished to burn, but was arrested before lighting them.
Key Issue
Was this an attempt or mere preparation?
Court’s Reasoning
Making molotov cocktails = preparation.
Transporting them to site = preparation.
Execution would start only by placing or igniting them.
No ignition or attempt to ignite = not attempt.
Outcome
Conviction for preparation of arson, not attempted arson.
✅ PART III — SUMMARY OF PRINCIPLES DEMONSTRATED BY THE CASES
When is it ATTEMPT?
An act is an attempt when:
The offender starts the execution act, and
Creates real danger of the crime being completed.
Examples of execution acts:
Swinging a knife at a victim
Sending a threat during extortion
Trying to pick up smuggled drugs
Firing a gun at someone
Placing explosive at target
When is it PREPARATION?
Preparation is punishable only when the law says so and includes acts like:
Acquiring weapons for an illegal purpose
Planning with accomplices
Conducting surveillance of target
Stockpiling explosive materials
Wearing masks and traveling toward the crime scene
Writing attack plans or gathering maps
Execution has not yet begun.
RELATED Blog
comments