论惩罚性赔偿的证明标准

不遵守填平原则的惩罚性赔偿与民事程序存在着一定的冲突。从最佳威慑与彻底威慑的角度看,惩罚性赔偿实质上处于民事责任与刑罚之间,甚至有时与罚金刑无异,故需要提高对被告人的程序保护,其证明标准应当具有中间性,适用明确而令人信服的证明标准。从诉求正确的可能性、举证成本、风险收益的角度看,反映行为人主观过错程度的侵权行为的异常性的证明负担应当分配给原告。     

Juror adjustments to the reasonable doubt standard of proof

The standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is based on the law's primary motivation to avoid false conviction even at the expense of increasing the probability of false acquittal. Individual jurors, however, have common sense motivations to make factually correct decisions by avoiding both types of error. As a result jurors may interpret the standard of reasonable doubt correctly but deviate from that interpretation in predictable ways when they apply the standard in court. This study makes three hypotheses: (1) jurors are less confident when deciding on acquittal than when deciding upon conviction, (2) conviction is associated with a downward adjustment of the interpreted stringency of the standard at the time of application, and (3) a highly stringent interpretation of the standard is associated with a severe downward adjustment of that stringency at the time of application. The study asked 260 juror-eligible participants to examine a trial scenario. The participants first interpreted the stringency of the legal standard on a probability scale. They then judged the probability of the defendant's guilt, decided on a verdict, and rated their confidence in that verdict. The findings strongly supported all three hypotheses. Application and implication of the study were discussed.     

第三层次有罪判决证明标准的技术性构建——基于现代证明科学进路的探索

现代法治社会对案件事实进行精确认定以实现惩罚犯罪和保障无辜这一双重目标的需求,以及出于对事实裁判者的主观规制与提高证明标准可操作适用性之考量,使得第三层次有罪判决证明标准之构建成为迫切必要.现代证明科学的兴起与发展,为构建第三层次的有罪判决证明标准提供了全新的视野与路径.基于证明科学进路,通过探寻并确立庭审证据分析与证据评价之科学有效方法和规则,能够找到满足证据分析与证据评价的科学且精细化之指标,运用这些指标最终能够塑造出第三层次有罪判决证明标准这样一个"动态模具".该标准在性质上属于或然性标准,具体包含四项科学且精细化的指标.裁判者通过运用有效的方法能够合理判断庭审证明是否符合这四项指标,并据此获得精确且正当可接受的裁判事实.     

也论推定规则适用中的证明责任和证明标准——兼与何家弘教授商榷

中国现行法不仅存在转移“完整证明责任”的推定规则，也存在类似于美国法上仅转移“举证责任”的推定规则。在中国，对推定事实进行有效反驳的证明标准不应该是统一的“优势证据”标准，而应该根据诉讼类型、推定类型不同而有所区分。     

也论推定规则适用中的证明责任和证明标准——兼与何家弘教授商榷

中国现行法不仅存在转移完整证明责任的推定规则,也存在类似于美国法上仅转移举证责任的推定规则。在中国,对推定事实进行有效反驳的证明标准不应该是统一的优势证据标准,而应该根据诉讼类型、推定类型不同而有所区分。     

Acquitting the guilty: Two case studies on jury misgivings and the misunderstood standard of proof

B.A., Harvard University 1951; LL.B., Yale University 1953. The author expresses appreciation for helpful comments from Professors Albert Alschuler, Joseph Grano, Henry Monaghan, and Lloyd Weinreb. Useful work was also contributed by my student research assistants, Nicholas Connon and Jack Yoskowitz. Research for this article was supported in part by the Walter E. Meyer Fund.     

多维度与差异化:认罪认罚案件的证明标准探析

有关认罪认罚案件的证明标准,理论界与实务界存在坚持说、差异说、降低说的三种观点,争论极大,官方则在表面坚持的基础上加以“基本事实、基本证据”的巧妙用词.从证明标准的三重维度分析,认罪案件、简单案件、量刑程序均会在一定程度上降低证明标准.有必要以防范冤假错案为底线,把握认罪认罚案件对口供补强的不同力度,摒弃“只能做,不能说”的证明标准潜规则,构建认罪认罚案件的差异化证明标准.     

Continuing barriers to women's credibility: A feminist perspective on the proof process

This article is an expanded version of a paper presented at the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law Conference on Reform of Evidence Law, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, August 3–7, 1992.     

Identification process in mass graves from the Spanish Civil War II

The identification process of a mass grave from the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) is presented. The presumed location of the grave, as well as the presumed number and identities of the persons buried in the grave were obtained exclusively from witnesses' and relatives' testimonies. In agreement with the testimonies, the grave was located at the indicated location and five skeletons were exhumed. Also in agreement with the testimonies, the osteological and DNA study led investigators to propose the identification of two kin groups, a father and his son and a pair of brothers. But the genetic study did not support the identification of a fifth man presumed to have been buried in the grave. The differences and similarities between this case and another case reported earlier are discussed.     

论民事习惯与民法方法——以《日本民法典》的制定经验为例

中国未来民法典与其传统伦理、传统法文化的重要渊源——民事习惯之关系问题在民法学界基本没有深入展开讨论.日本民法典制定过程中对民事习惯所采取的从排斥到吸纳甚至给予极高地位的反复经验对中国未来民法典如何体现中国特色可能具有重要的启示.日本民法典有关民事习惯的制度安排及其后续遗留问题的处理模式对中国未来民法典民事习惯位置的讨论提供了生动的个案.中国当下的社会结构以及经济发展程度需要将来的民法典必需慎重对待中国固有民事习惯,以便保障民法典的伦理基础和惯行定式.     

公务员精神与公务员制度

公务员精神来源于公务员制度的本质规定。具有中国特色的社会主义公务员制度决定了中国公务员精神与西方公务员精神既有相同之处,又在“政治中立”这一点上有着根本的区别。随着中国特色社会主义公务员制度的不断完善,公务员精神的内涵也应当不断丰富和发展。公务员精神体现了公务员制度中的爱国主义、集体主义、职业精神和时代精神。当前最为迫切的就是以个人自律、组织教育、制度控制、环境制约等为主要途径,从精神、制度与方法的有机结合上促使每个公务员真正成为“公务员精神”的实践者和体现者。