劝导说服在司法心理测试中的应用

司法心理测试应用于刑事侦查时,其最终目的是了解案件的事实真相。心理测试员应根据被测人的心理各不相同的特点,采用同情理解法、激励法、推托罪责法、减轻精神负担法、连累亲人法、摆脱困境法等不同的劝导说服法,来影响被测人说出真情。     

暗示的“质”“量”“度”

暗示有多种类型,有语言方式,辅助语言方式,类语言方式等等;暗示的作用极为广泛,有试探性暗示,批驳性暗示,疏导性暗示等等;暗示在使用上也各具特色,有零度型暗示,轻度型暗示和重度型暗示等等.暗示不失为一种含蓄有力而有效的讯问手段.     

律师提前介入问题再探

为实现律师提前介入之立法意图 ,刑事诉讼法第九十六条关于律师介入侦查程序的具体时间应提前至犯罪嫌疑人被第一次讯问前 ,并应增加规定侦查人员有义务立即告知犯罪嫌疑人有聘请律师提供法律帮助之权利 ,同时将免费律师法律援助制度引入侦查程序。     

我国侦查讯问程序的特点及完善

人权保障与犯罪控制的价值冲突存在于整个刑事诉讼中。在犯罪控制过程中,侵犯人权的情况出现最多的是在侦查阶段,且突出表现在对犯罪嫌疑人的讯问方面,因此引起了理论界和社会对此的高度关注。如何构建一个法治化的侦查讯问程序,以更好地保障人权便成为我国刑事诉讼制度发展的中的一个重大问题。     

Police interrogation practice in Slovenia

Interrogation techniques are well explored, but in Slovenia it has remained unknown what interrogation techniques are used and what the basic characteristics of suspect interrogations are. The Slovenian interrogation manual proposes some coercive interrogation techniques and neglects their weaknesses. The aim of the current study was to examine Slovenian police officers’ beliefs as to the basic characteristics of their interrogations and whether techniques proposed by the manual are used in practice to begin to provide some insight into what actually happens in such interrogations. A survey instrument was used to obtain self-report data from a sample of criminal investigators. From 86 completed questionnaires it was found that a typical interrogation of a suspect lasts around 90 minutes and is not recorded. Interviewers typically use three interrogation techniques namely (i) conducting interrogations in isolation; (ii) identifying contradictions in the suspect's story; and (iii) confronting the suspect with evidence. Findings suggest that some coercive interrogation techniques are used in practice (e.g. offering moral justifications, alluding to have evidence of guilt, good cop/bad cop routine, and minimization). The study is the first insight into the practices of Slovenian investigators when questioning suspects. Differences among general, white-collar and organized crime investigators are also discussed.     

Increasing pressure does not benefit lie detection: a reply to Ten Brinke et al. (2015)

When passively attending to suspects, observers are poor at distinguishing lies from truths. Deception research has therefore shifted to examining interview styles aimed at eliciting and enhancing deception cues. Based upon a literature review and three empirical studies, ten Brinke, L., Khambatta, P., and Carney, D. R. [2015. Physically scarce (vs. enriched) environments decrease the ability to successfully tell lies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 982–992. doi:10.1037/xge0000103] recommend increasing pressure on interviewees as it would increase lie detection accuracy. In this comment, we argue that these authors (1) misinterpret the literature when concluding that lie detection benefits from increasing pressure on interviewees, and (2) their data do not show that lie detection is more accurate when pressure is increased. In absence of such data, we recommend that increasing pressure on interviewees should be avoided: it hampers the elicitation of valuable information and can lead to false confessions.     

论精神障碍犯罪嫌疑人的讯问规则

因精神障碍犯罪嫌疑人在受讯问时,有受暗示性较强、依从性及内化性较强、更容易作出虚假供述的特征,因此对精神障碍犯罪嫌疑人的讯问应有特殊的法律规则进行规范。具体而言,应当建立对精神障碍嫌疑人进行适合讯问的评估制度,对于可以在适当成年人在场的情况下讯问的精神障碍嫌疑人,在讯问时应让适当成年人在场对嫌疑人进行保护并监督讯问行为。另外,基于精神障碍嫌疑人对抗讯问的能力较弱,应限制适用威胁、引诱、欺骗等通常情况下具有一定容许性的讯问策略,其他讯问策略也不得超出精神障碍嫌疑人的承受能力。     

历史和现实的双重诘难--浅议马克思主义的时代境遇

马克思主义曾经经历了辉煌的时代，但如今却在全世界走向了低谷。马克思主义“过时论”、“终结论”、“危机论”和“无用论”等无时无刻不在与各种社会思潮一起，同马克思主义争夺意识形态阵地。应对马克思主义当下所面临的危机，必须遵从理论联系实际的原则，在危机中进一步充实和发展马克思主义。     

审讯中如何驳回犯罪嫌疑人的辩解

刑事审讯过程中经常要面对犯罪嫌疑人的各类辩解。为避免审讯僵局、持续施加压力、顺利固定证据,审讯人员应当综合运用态度指责法、逻辑推理突显矛盾、连续性追问等施压型策略和釜底抽薪消弭矛盾、归利解释装饰矛盾、常理常情引导等引导型策略,有效驳回犯罪嫌疑人的辩解。