Proof of cancer causation and expert evidence: bringing science to the law and the law to science

This article discusses the medico-scientific and the legal views of cancer causation and how these two approaches impact on expert evidence. Cancer cause lends itself well to an exploration of the critical issues which surround its proof and the role of expert evidence in this proof. The article does not seek to identify or to resolve all the controversies or inconsistencies in the area. Rather, it sets up a basic framework for the general presentation and testing of expert medico-scientific evidence in litigation related to cancer causation. Specifically, it seeks to identify the technical questions of law and medical science regarding which medico-scientific disciplines can be relevant to proving cancer causation, and who the relevant expert witnesses to achieve this task would be. Emerging areas of cancer causation are then examined in light of this framework.     

Inducing jurors to disregard inadmissible evidence: A legal explanation does not help

Three experiments investigated mock jurors' ability to disregard inadmissible prior conviction evidence and hearsay. In Experiments 1 and 2, college students listened to an audiotape enacting a theft trial. The critical evidence favored the prosecution and was objected to by the defense. In three different conditions the judge either ruled the evidence admissible, ruled it inadmissible, or ruled it inadmissible and explained the legal basis for the ruling. In a fourth condition no critical evidence was presented. The critical witness' credibility was also manipulated. With prior conviction evidence but not hearsay the legal explanation “backfired.” In addition, the critical witness' credibility did not affect subjects' ability to disregard inadmissible evidence. The results of Experiment 3 suggest that the legal explanation may have affected the use of hearsay and prior conviction evidence differently because of subjects' dissimilar preconceptions of the fairness of using the two evidence items to assess guilt.     

Sudden unexpected infant death due to fibroma of the heart

A 7-month-old previously healthy female infant was found dead in her crib by her mother shortly after having been laid down to sleep following the noontime feeding. Because the child did not suffer from an acute illness and no other evidence pointed to a cause of death, it was initially assumed by the police that she had died of sudden infant death syndrome. At autopsy, however, the cause of death was determined to be cardiac arrhythmia secondary to fibroma of the heart.     

德国刑事司法实践中证人拒绝作证的新发展——从两个案例出发

中国学界近年一直激烈讨论外国法中的＂非法证据排除制度＂,其中包括德国刑事诉讼法中的证据禁止制度。对于德国刑事诉讼法第55条规定的＂不得自证其罪原则＂和第52条至第54条规定的＂拒绝作证权＂的讨论尤为激烈,纷纷主张在中国建立相应的刑事诉讼制度规范,以保障犯罪嫌疑人、被告人和证人的权益。德国法判例表明,违背＂不得自证其罪原则＂将导致德国法上的证据使用禁止。另外,德国法庭审判强调直接审理原则,其中调查程序中的笔录不可以作为证据在法庭审判中宣读,甚至对于传闻证据——调查程序中进行审讯的警察和检察官——也不可以作为证人出庭作证。     

Busting the Myth of the Unavailability of Insurance Rule's Application to Loss Allocation for Pollution Liability Claims Since 1986

Tens of millions of dollars in pollution liability losses have been mistakenly allocated to general liability insurers under the “Unavailability of Insurance” rule in jurisdictions that employ it. Under this rule, a policyholder is not allocated losses for years when they claim that pollution liability was unavailable – mainly after the advent of the 1986 “absolute” pollution exclusion. Recent research has been compiled to include thousands of pages of evidence that by 1986 and to this date there was and has been a viable pollution liability insurance market that would not only underwrite a current year's risks, but also erase any prior pollution insurance coverage gaps by insuring decades of prior acts. This article looks at this rule and the enormous impact it could have on insurers' pollution liability reserves if it continues to be misapplied.     

Electronic evidence: A proposal to reform the presumption of reliability and hearsay

There is a general concern amongst judges, lawyers and legal scholars that evidence in digital format is not to be trusted, given that it can be altered and manipulated with ease. Some jurists have called for a UN Convention on matters relating to the authentication and admissibility of electronic evidence. It is debatable whether such a Convention is necessary, but guidance of an international nature might be welcome, providing that any such guidance remains guidance, and does not ossify into legal requirements that fail to take into account the dynamic and constantly developing changes in information technology. In any event, the accuracy of the presumption in England & Wales that a computer is in order at the material time is highly debatable, and it is suggested that this presumption ought to be reformed.     

Wiping the Slate Clean: Reforming Scots Law's Approach to Evidence of the Accused's Bad Character

This paper discusses the Scottish Law Commission (SLC)'s Report on Similar Fact Evidence and the Moorov Doctrine, which proposes revolutionary changes to the way in which Scots law deals with evidence of the accused's bad character, including his previous convictions. The article sets these proposals in context by explaining the existing Scots law, and comparing it to the English provisions on bad character evidence contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003. This comparison reveals similarities between the responses of the two jurisdictions. It is remarkable that the SLC did not consider English law to be a viable model for reform, choosing instead to propose legislation which would simply deem certain pieces of bad character evidence relevant in criminal trials. The second part of the paper explains why these proposals should not be implemented.     

电子邮件真实性鉴定方法探索

2012年3月14日通过的《刑事诉讼法》中将“电子数据”确立为一种证据种类。由于电子数据容易复制和修改,通常需要对其进行真实性鉴定后才能作为证据采信。我国电子数据司法鉴定相关技术的研究起步较晚,体系建设不完全。通过选取电子数据真实性鉴定中最常见的电子邮件,结合实际案例中积累的实践经验,对电子邮件真实性鉴定方法进行一系列的探索和归纳．旨在促进行业内技术交流,推进研究成果向实际应用的转化。     

Eliciting cues to deception by tactical disclosure of evidence: The first test of the Evidence Framing Matrix

Purpose. Research on real‐life suspect interviews shows that disclosure of evidence is a very common tactic and that it occurs in all phases of the interview. It is therefore remarkable that there is hardly any research on the effectiveness of different disclosure tactics. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of three different disclosure tactics: presenting the evidence early and two versions of the Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) technique. Methods. For the SUE‐Basic technique (SUE‐B), the evidence was disclosed late in the interview. For the SUE‐Incremental technique (SUE‐I), we used a stepwise disclosure tactic derived from the so‐called Evidence Framing Matrix. The tactic consists of revealing evidence of increasing strength and precision. A mock‐theft scenario was employed with 195 participants who were randomly allocated to one of six conditions: guilty or innocent suspects were interviewed with one of the three techniques. Two measures of inconsistency were used as dependent variables: statement‐evidence inconsistency and the newly developed within‐statement inconsistency. Results. By interviewing with SUE‐I, strong cues to deception were elicited, especially for the statement‐evidence inconsistency variable. For the SUE‐B, significant but smaller differences between guilty and innocent suspects were obtained. Conclusions. We found that both when and how the evidence was disclosed moderated the effectiveness of disclosure. With respect to when, it was more effective to disclose the evidence late (vs. early), and with respect to how, it was more effective to disclose the evidence in a stepwise (vs. direct) manner. The tactical aspects of evidence disclosure are discussed.     

把证据学打造成全人类的科学──三论实质证据观

事实是一切学科的对象。事实不是陈述、命题、描述和断定。事实是指客观外界存在或不存在、发生或未发生的全部情况和过程。事实可分为如下类型：一、静态事实和动态事实;二、积极事实和消极事实;三、自然事实和人为事实;四、历史事实和当前事实。事实有四大功能,即认识的基础、证明的根据、检验的标准、思想的指南。事实有两重属性：一为客观性;二为关联性。证据也有两重属性。证据的客观性指的还是事实的客观性,证据的关联性指的也还是事实的关联性。可见,事实就是证据。事实有四大功能,证据自然也有四大功能。证据不限于司法工作需要,全人类都需要。因此,要把证据学打造成全人类的科学。     

证据的客观性特征质疑

将证据定义为“客观事实”的结果 ,使证据必然具有客观性的特征。但在“证据材料”的形成和“证据材料”上升为“证据”的过程中 ,难免渗入有关人员的主观性 ,而认定证据权的依法行使 ,又使一定前提下的主观性为法律许可。悖论由此而生 :“客观性”的特征要求证据必须是客观存在的事实 ,但依法产生的证据却未必就是客观存在的事实。证据的客观性特征既不符合辩证唯物主义的认识论 ,又有悖于证据形成的法律规范 ,故应当舍弃。     

瑕疵证据排除规则在民事检察抗诉中的运用

瑕疵证据主要是指在形成过程或者形式、审查程序等方面不合法的证据。瑕疵证据不同于非法证据,瑕疵证据的收集并未侵害他人合法权益或者违反法律禁止性规定,但由于瑕疵证据存在瑕疵,其证明力受到削弱或者消解,需要其他证据予以补强,且如果证据存在重大瑕疵,法律规定其不能被采信作为认定事实的依据。人民法院生效判决、裁定采信了存在重大瑕疵的证据并作为认定事实的主要证据的,检察机关应当提出抗诉。     

论证明的自由

在我国,诉讼法学界一直对自由心证原则持批判和否定态度,大多学者认为自由心证的哲学基础是唯心主义,与我国以马克思辩证唯物主义为指导的“实事求是”证据制度格格不入。但随着学术交流的不断深入,学者们对自由心证的认识也越来越深刻,纷纷著书立说为自由心证正名,认为自由心证恰恰回归到了马克思辩证唯物主义认识论。本文从不同证据制度中对证据审查判断的特殊性的比较入手,对自由心证证据制度作了初步的研究,并分析了我国实事求是的证据制度下审查判断证据的标准及如何进行制度上的完善。     

The Empirical Slippery Slope from Voluntary to Non-Voluntary Euthanasia

This article examines the evidence for the empirical argument that there is a slippery slope between the legalization of voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia. The main source of evidence in relation to this argument comes from the Netherlands. The argument is only effective against legalization if it is legalization which causes the slippery slope. Moreover, it is only effective if it is used comparatively-to show that the slope is more slippery in jurisdictions which have legalized voluntary euthanasia than it is in jurisdictions which have not done so. Both of these elements are examined comparatively.     

论刑事诉讼中的电子数据

2012年修改的《刑事诉讼法》将电子数据首次规定为法定证据种类,但电子数据的相关证据规则仍不够完善。我国现有关于电子数据的研究多集中于电子数据取证、鉴定等技术方法,缺少对电子数据证据能力、证明力及证据规则的研究。从电子数据在司法实践中存在的问题出发,在电子数据的证据属性,电子数据的鉴真、鉴定,非法证据排除规则等几个方面探讨如何加强对电子数据的证据限制问题。     

Television Food Marketing to Children Revisited: The Federal Trade Commission Has the Constitutional and Statutory Authority to Regulate

The evidence reveals that young children are targeted by food and beverage advertisers but are unable to comprehend the commercial context and persuasive intent of marketing. Although the First Amendment protects commercial speech, it does not protect deceptive and misleading speech for profit. Marketing directed at children may fall into this category of unprotected speech. Further, children do not have the same First Amendment right to receive speech as adults. For the first time since the Federal Trade Commission's original attempt to regulate marketing to children in the 1970s (termed KidVid), the political, scientific, and legal climate coalesce to make the time well-suited to reevaluate the FTC's authority for action. This paper analyzes the constitutional authority for the FTC to regulate television food marketing directed at children as deceptive in light of the most robust public health evidence on the subject.     

困境与抉择：我国引入刑事传闻规则的法理论析

我国当前刑事庭审中存在着诸多弊端，与传闻证据不受限制的使用非常有关，应当引入刑事传闻规则。这不仅有利于发现案件真实，而且有利于保障被告人接受公正审判的权利，特别是对质询问权，实现程序公正，还有助于完善证据制度，实现诉讼的效率。而且，引入刑事传闻规则还具有来自现行制度及法律实践需求的可行性，所谓中国引入传闻规则不可行的观点是站不住脚的。     

举证时限制度的冷思考

在价值目标上,举证时限制度不仅偏离实体公正,而且不可能真正提高诉讼效率,同时也不能真正体现和实现程序正义。大陆法系国家几乎找不到类似中国举证时限的立法体例,英美法系国家有举证时限,但其是以陪审制和漫长、充分的证据开示为依托的,且设立举证时限、证据开示的真正目的不是在于提高效率,而是发现真实,破除“竞技论”的弊端。如果说我国的举证时限制度是属于外国制度的大胆引入,那么,忽视了其制度背景和功能实质的移植是难以达到立法目的的。     

论自白补强证据规则

在我国,简易程序中的法庭上自白可以不需要补强,除此之外,其他一切刑事案件中的自白都需要补强;在对自白进行补强时,自白的补强证据只要能够保证自白的真实性即可,而不应当在补强的范围上作形式上的要求。自白的补强证据除了应当具备一般意义上的证据能力外,还必须独立于被补强的自白;在程度上,补强证据只要能与自白结合在一起使法官产生确信即可,而不需要达到能独立使法官产生确信的程度。另外,共犯自白在作为认定其他共犯犯罪的证据时同样需要补强证据;共犯自白可以作为其他共犯自白的补强证据。