导致法医临床学鉴定结论偏差的原因

随着法制建设的日臻完善和人民群众法制意识的不断增强,法医活体检验方面存在的问题越来越多地被暴露出来,从而使法医临床学鉴定的科学性和公信度大打折扣,使法医鉴定工作陷入尴尬境地。     

Communicating forensic scientific expertise: An analysis of expert reports and corresponding testimony in Tasmanian courts

Forensic criminology examines the use of forensic science in society. Justice can be hampered, for example, if the communication of forensic scientific findings is unclear or misleading, even if unintentionally. Although various recommendations guide the communication of forensic science, it is unclear whether they are reflected in practice. This study explored the communication of forensic biology in 10 cases of major crimes against the person heard in the Tasmanian Supreme Court, where the standard practice is to issue brief summary reports in the first instance. The content of expert reports and corresponding testimony was analysed to determine its adherence to recommendations outlined in standards, practice notes, and research. While reports were found to be very brief, testimony elaborated on all major elements. Mostly elicited by the prosecution, some elements were volunteered by expert witnesses, or raised by defence. Overall, expert evidence in courts—but not reports (due to the use of brief summary reports)—largely adhered to recommendations. Further research is needed to determine the prevalence and effectiveness of alternative approaches to communication that were identified in certain cases.     

知情同意诉讼中的证据学:英美法的观察

在传统的医疗过失侵权诉讼中,为了体现行外人士对医疗这一专家型行业的尊重,医疗专家证言在诉讼中发挥着重要的甚至决定性的作用。知情同意诉讼,虽被归入医疗过失侵权诉讼,却提供了一个不同于传统的医疗领域——诊断治疗——的情景。知情同意的独特性改变了专家证言在诉讼中的格局。在知情同意诉讼中,医疗专家证言的参与度和重要性遭到削弱。以患者为取向的信息披露标准的建立意味着法律的关注点已从"专家"整体转移到"患者";对"医学判断"所管辖领域的精细分割也说明,医疗专家证言只应在证明医疗信息的感知和启用"医疗特权"上有应用价值,医疗信息的实质性判断已让位于一般人知识,而且对"医疗特权"的严格控制会缩减医疗专家证言的适用空间;因果关系的认定和选择影响到医疗专家证言和患者证言的地位变化,尽管存在"事后诸葛"效应,为了与知情同意法则之主旨相匹配,主观化的因果关系应是前进方向。     

国外专家证人制度对我国医疗损害鉴定体制改革的启示

司法鉴定过程中专家证人制度是其灵魂。就国外来说，大陆法系和英美法系对专家证人制度的规定大相径庭。本文从概念定位、选任和出庭制度等方面比较大陆法系和英美法系在专家证人方面的规定，进而提出完善我国专家证人制度的若干建议。     

Study of the correlation between psychiatric and psychological diagnoses in sample offenders

This study deals with the frequency with which expert psychiatrists and psychologists make structural or nosographic diagnoses within the context of expert assessment.Thus, the rates of concordance between psychiatrists and psychologists in both types of diagnoses will be assessed.To do so, the level of inter-observer agreement on diagnoses between 1990 and 2003 was studied retrospectively in France through psychiatric and psychological assessments of 505 male offenders. The assessment of the correlation rates was carried out using the Kappa coefficient.The results show a range of 0.55 to 0.71 in inter-observer (psychiatrists vs psychologists) agreement for structural diagnoses, and 0.51 to 0.89 for nosographic diagnoses.In addition, a marked correlation between psychiatrists and psychologists may be noted regarding abstention in both structural (k = 66) and nosographic (k = 73) diagnoses. In fact, recommendations are made for improvement in the consistency of offender assessment in the psycho-legal French context.     

摇晃婴儿综合征:科学(与非科学)专家的一场真实交战

本文从科学和法律层面介绍了摇晃婴儿综合征的有关内容,就关于摇晃婴儿综合征的科学和非科学专家证言的可采性进行了评价,称在科学和非科学专家之间正在发生一场真实的交战。     

摇晃婴儿综合征:科学(与非科学)专家的一场真实交战

本文从科学和法律层面介绍了摇晃婴儿综合征的有关内容,就关于摇晃婴儿综合征的科学和非科学专家证言的可采性进行了评价,称在科学和非科学专家之间正在发生一场真实的交战.     

高校司法鉴定人及其出庭问题研究

司法鉴定人的主体地位决定其是改善和健全现阶段司法鉴定制度的根本途径和关键环节。在当前司法实践中鉴定人出庭难、出庭率低等已成为亟待解决的弊病。高校司法鉴定人作为鉴定人的重要组成部分。在保障当事人合法权益、推进鉴定理论化进程等方面发挥着重要作用。高校司法鉴定人以其身份之特殊性在当今司法鉴定领域承栽着特殊的意义,对其出庭等相关问题的妥善解决必将打开完善我国司法鉴定人出庭制度的关键一环。     

论司法鉴定人出庭作证

我国的三大诉讼法和仲裁法皆把司法鉴定结论作为法定证据,鉴定人是鉴定结论产生的主体,必然受到诉讼制度和证据制度的规范,而具有一定的法律地位和责任。在我国当前的诉讼模式下,诉讼证据依靠两个屏障加以过滤:其一,当事人、鉴定人出庭质证参与诉讼;其二,由法官的采证、法官的内心确信而形成。所以鉴定人出庭出具作为证据的司法鉴定结论,接受当事人的质询和法官的询问,这是鉴定程序的最后阶段,也是鉴定结论能否升华为诉讼证据的关键所在,直接影响法庭对鉴定结论的采信。鉴于此,鉴定人出庭作证是十分必要和必须进行规范。当前,鉴定人出庭甚少,该制度需要进行调整和完善。     

药物麻醉分析中的法律问题

司法精神病鉴定中被鉴定人也享有沉默权。因为享有沉默权的主体包括所有公民 ,使用的时机是任何有可能导致被追究刑事责任的时候 ,沉默权的效果之一是禁止使用麻醉分析方法收集证据。因此所有在麻醉分析过程中获得的材料都不得被作为证据采纳。但是鉴定结论可以作为专家证据由法庭决定是否采纳。