从“伤害原则”看恶意诉讼的本质——以民事诉讼为视角

一般认为,民事纠纷的发生表明了当事人对利益状态的不满或对实体法效力的挑战和质疑,这构成了司法救济介入的逻辑前提。然而,权利的赋予与滥用往往如一对孪生兄弟。在权利得到彰显的时代,“伪纠纷”日益增多。近年来,恶意诉讼已经成为法治进程中正向构建与反向利用之间博弈的重大命题。这一方面对私益形成了滋扰和侵害,另一方面浪费了司法资源并使得司法权威受到了藐视。由于恶意诉讼对多种法益构成了伤害,因此,必须在对其本质做出清晰界定的前提下进行有效的规制。     

The Development and Application of Random Match Probabilities to Firearm and Toolmark Identification

The field of firearms and toolmark analysis has encountered deep scrutiny of late, stemming from a handful of voices, primarily in the law and statistical communities. While strong scrutiny is a healthy and necessary part of any scientific endeavor, much of the current criticism leveled at firearm and toolmark analysis is, at best, misinformed and, at worst, punditry. One of the most persistent criticisms stems from the view that as the field lacks quantified random match probability data (or at least a firm statistical model) with which to calculate the probability of a false match, all expert testimony concerning firearm and toolmark identification or source attribution is unreliable and should be ruled inadmissible. However, this critique does not stem from the hard work of actually obtaining data and performing the scientific research required to support or reject current findings in the literature. Although there are sound reasons (described herein) why there is currently no unifying probabilistic model for the comparison of striated and impressed toolmarks as there is in the field of forensic DNA profiling, much statistical research has been, and continues to be, done to aid the criminal justice system. This research has thus far shown that error rate estimates for the field are very low, especially when compared to other forms of judicial error. The first purpose of this paper is to point out the logical fallacies in the arguments of a small group of pundits, who advocate a particular viewpoint but cloak it as fact and research. The second purpose is to give a balanced review of the literature regarding random match probability models and statistical applications that have been carried out in forensic firearm and toolmark analysis.     

包庇罪若干问题探讨

包庇罪特有的行为方式——作假证明包庇,决定了其行为对象及行为时间的相对确定性:"犯罪的人"只限于犯罪嫌疑人和被告人而不可能包括已决犯,同时"作假证明包庇"也意味着,其行为的时间只可能发生在刑事诉讼程序已经启动生效判决尚未作出前。"包庇"不仅是"作假证明"行为所具有的客观性质,也是行为人主观故意的内容。包庇罪和伪证罪存在着一定的交叉竞合关系。我国刑法规定的包庇罪同人伦关系存在冲突,在新的立法规定出台之前,我们可以充分利用《刑法》总则第13条"但书"的出罪功能及包庇罪和伪证罪的竞合关系来消解和减少这种冲突。     

Fourier-transformed infrared breath testing after ingestion of technical alcohol

The study aim was to evaluate the feasibility of a Fourier-transformed infrared (FT-IR) analyzer for out-of-laboratory use by screening the exhalations of inebriated individuals, and to determine analysis quality using common breath components and solvents. Each of the 35 inebriated participants gave an acceptable sample. Because of the metabolism of 2-propanol, the subjects exhaled high concentrations of acetone in addition to ethanol. Other volatile ingredients of technical ethanol products (methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, and 2-propanol) were also detected. The lower limits of quantification for the analyzed components ranged from 1.7 to 12 microg/L in simulated breath samples. The bias was +/-2% for ethanol and -11% for methanol. Within-day and between-day coefficients of variation were <1% for ethanol and <4% for methanol. The bias of ethanol and methanol analyses due to coexisting solvents ranged from -0.8 to +2.2% and from -5.6 to +2.9%, respectively. The FT-IR method proved suitable for use outside the laboratory and fulfilled the quality criteria for analysis of solvents in breath.     

无辜者认罪的成因分析——基于美国司法实践的阐释

作为一种现实中存在的现象,虚假供述尚未引起我国司法人员的注意,而对此美国学者却进行了深入分析。美国学者根据虚假供述成因的不同将虚假供述区分为三类——自愿性虚假供述、强迫顺从虚假供述与强迫内在化虚假供述,并对各类虚假供述的成因进行了具体的分析,美国学者关于虚假供述成因的分析对我国深刺认识心理强制时代的侦查讯问具有很强的启示意义。     

The Concealed Information Test is Susceptible to Misleading Information

An approach toward detecting hidden knowledge is the Concealed Information Test (CIT). It relies on the memory of crime‐relevant information. This study investigated whether its validity is susceptible to memory distortion by misleading information. A misleading information paradigm was employed to distort memory prior to an interrogation with a CIT. Forty‐one participants watched a video with specific crime‐related information. After a 1‐week retention interval, misleading information was introduced. Afterward, a CIT was performed, followed by a threefold memory test. When misleading information was presented, memory performance was reduced, and no physiological response differences between crime‐relevant and crime‐irrelevant information were found. Without presenting misleading information, physiological responses differed between responses to crime‐relevant and crime‐irrelevant information. However, responses in all physiological measures also differed between misleading and irrelevant information. The results indicate that the CIT is susceptible to misleading information, which reduces its validity in specific constellations.     

论不真正不作为犯的作为义务来源

对于不真正不作为犯的义务来源,学说史上共形成了三种作为义务说,即形式的作为义务说、实质的作为义务说和二元的作为义务说。通过对以上学说的深入分析和探讨,二元作为义务说应更具合理性。不真正不作为犯的作为义务来源应是实质要素与形式要素的统一,前者界定了作为义务的事实性根据,后者则统一了作为义务的规范性要式。     

广告荐证人承担连带责任的司法认定——针对《广告法(修订征求意见稿)》第60条的研究

国家工商行政管理总局日前出台了《广告法(修订征求意见稿)》,对广告荐证人的法律责任问题做出了相对明确的规定。从法律责任的构成要件上看,《广告法(修订征求意见稿)》第60条与《食品安全法》第55条的规定基本一致,即要求"其他广告参与者"在广告中的角色为产品的荐证人;其行为构成虚假荐证;消费者有受损的事实;荐证行为与消费选择之间存在因果联系。依据这些责任要件,在司法实践中,对荐证人和虚假荐证的认定、因果关系的判断以及具体责任形式的确定等问题,都需要在深入研究的基础上加以明确。     

公司股东抽逃出资的法律制裁及完善

随着我国社会主义市场经济的不断发展．作为市场经济重要参与主体之一的公司也在其中发挥着重要作用。公司资本是公司财产的重要组成部分,是公司具有法人人格最基础的物质基础,是维护公司对外交易安全、股东、债权人以及公司等合法权益的重要保证。对公司而言．股东出资是公司成立和存续的物质基础,是公司资本形成的最基本途径。然而,股东抽逃出资是公司治理中较为普遍的现象。本文在对股东抽逃出资内涵界定的基础上,对其法律制裁措施的不足、成因以及出路做以探讨,以期为完善股东抽逃出资的法律制裁措施提供参考。