论刑事鉴定结论的采用标准

刑事鉴定结论的采用标准是我国刑事证据制度问题研究中一个不可或缺的组成部分,是法官对某一鉴定结论是否可以作为“定案的根据”行使自由裁量权的依据,是鉴定人制作鉴定文书的“行动指南”,也是控辩双方质疑其能否作为“定案根据”的依据。对鉴定结论客观性、相关性和合法性的探讨对刑事诉讼立法和实践均有所裨益。     

不应遗漏的证据种类——搜查笔录

搜查与讯问犯罪嫌疑人、询问证人、勘验、检查、鉴定等都是刑事侦查的重要措施 ,但是 ,刑诉法却未将搜查笔录规定为刑事诉讼的证据 ,使这一能证明案件真实情况的笔录 ,不能像勘验、检查笔录等证据那样 ,在开庭审判、指控犯罪中作为证据使用 ,这不利于揭露犯罪和打击犯罪。因此 ,笔者建议 ,将搜查笔录列为刑事诉讼证据 ,理由是 :一、搜查笔录能证明案件的真实情况搜查笔录是侦查人员对与案件有关的场所、物品、身体进行强制性搜寻、检查后制作的笔录 ,其附件包括扣押物品清单。笔录除写明搜查人、见证人等内容外 ,主要写明搜查的时间、地点、…     

运用勘验笔录和现场笔录应注意的问题

运用勘验笔录和现场笔录应注意的问题张月满勘验笔录和现场笔录是我国诉讼法中规定的重要的证据种类，它们对于查清各类性质的案件事实起着不可忽视的作用，为减少运用中的失误。充分发挥其作为定案依据的作用，我们在运用中应注意以下几个问题。一、正确认识并区分勘验笔...     

鉴定结论,勘验,检查笔录的独立性

《法律科学》98年1期登载了裴苍龄同志的《论证据资料》一文（以下简称《裴文》），其独特的论证角度令人耳目一新。但对其中一些观点，也有商榷之处。一、关于“模糊了勘验、检查和鉴定的性质，也模糊了勘验、检查人和鉴定人的性质”问题《裴文》认为：“勘验、检查笔录是由勘验人、检查人通过勘验、检查活动制作出来的；鉴定结论也是由鉴定人通过鉴定活动制作出来的。”因此，把鉴定结论、勘验、检查笔录作为独立的证据种类就“模糊了勘验、检查和鉴定的性质”，“就意味着勘验、检查和鉴定都是制造证据的工作，也意味着勘验、检查人和鉴…     

勘验、检查笔录规则研究

本文从证据学、心理学等角度阐述了勘验、检查笔录得以存在的理论基础,以新的视角——勘验、检查笔录特点、形成过程、证明作用及诉讼证据的内在本质——重新认识其证据属性,提出仍应保留勘验、检查笔录这一证据形式的观点,并就勘验、检查笔录的证据规则及程序规则进行探讨,以期对刑事证据立法和刑事诉讼实践提供理论方面的参考。     

行政机关收集的证据在刑事诉讼中的运用

《刑事诉讼法》规定行政机关收集的证据材料可以在刑事诉讼中作为证据使用,其所指的是实物证据而非言词证据,应包括勘验笔录和现场笔录。这些证据材料欲成为定案证据,需经过关联性、客观性和可采性的审查,尤其是证据的鉴真审查。判断行政机关收集证据程序的合法性,应与侦查机关收集证据程序适用不同标准,审慎适用排除规则,对由此带来的侦查机关通过行政机关"借壳"取证的可能性也应有充分的警惕。     

侦查办案收集证据的视阈——从法定证据种类的不完整性谈起

我国刑事诉讼证据种类的缺失我国《刑事诉讼法》第四十二条第一款规定:证明案件真实情况的一切事实,都是证据。证据有下列七种:物证、书证;证人证言;被害人陈述;犯罪嫌疑人、被告人供述和辩解;鉴定结论;勘验、检查笔录;视听资料。以上证据必须经过查证属实,才能作为定案的证据。实践中,能够证明案件事实的材料远不止这七种,现行法定证据种类存在许多遗漏。     

浅谈刑事诉讼中笔录类证据的运用

一、刑事诉讼中笔录类证据的适用现状 一是笔录类证据作为定案依据大量存在。在刑事案件审判过程中，公诉机关和侦查人员单方面制作的笔录大量存在于案卷材料中。由于笔录类证据的制作主体的特殊性和它天然的优势，     

论刑事诉讼中勘验、检查笔录的证据能力

刑事诉讼中勘验、检查笔录的应然范围应当仅包括五官感知类笔录,不应包括搜查、扣押类笔录与证据提取类笔录,其在证据属性上应当属于言词证据。国外在勘验、检查笔录证据能力立法模式的设置上,存在传闻证据模式与直接言词模式两类,我国宜选择传闻证据模式,但同时应当借鉴直接言词模式的成功经验。针对我国勘验、检查笔录缺乏证据能力规则约束,勘验、检查人员出庭作证缺乏规制的问题,应当对勘验、检查笔录的证据能力规则予以建构。勘验、检查笔录原则上不具备证据能力,应当要求法庭审判时法官亲自进行勘验、检查或者侦查人员出庭作证。勘验、检查笔录只有符合以"可信性之情况保障"与"必要性"为设置标准的例外情形时,才具备证据能力。     

单位证明是一种特殊的证据种类

《刑事诉讼法》第四十二条规定：“证明案件真实情况的一切事实，都是证据。证据有下列七种：(一)物证、书证；(二)证人证言；(三)被害人陈述；(四)犯罪嫌疑人、被告人供述和辩解；(五)鉴定结论；(六)勘验、检查笔录；(七)视听资料。以上证据必须经过查证属实，才能作为定案的根据。”这实质上就是我国刑事证据的概念和法定种类划分。     

论同步录音录像的口供功能

实践中,同步录音录像多用作视听资料,证明讯问笔录的合法性,从而忽略了它由于记录了口供及其非文字信息而具有的作为口供证据的功能。同步录音录像的口供功能包括通过查看同步录音录像,发现案件线索,找到案件侦查突破口,也包括作为口供证据直接证明犯罪事实。检察机关将同步录音录像作为口供使用可以更好地解决检察机关自侦案件证据缺乏的难题。为实现上述同步录音录像的口供功能,应当提高侦查人员分析判断同步录音录像的能力,积极将同步录音录像作为供述证据使用,避免法官在查看同步录音录像时的认知偏见等等。     

Facing Your Criminal Record: Expungement and the Collateral Problem of Wrongfully Represented Self

While substantial sociolegal research has analyzed the deleterious effects of criminal records on life outcomes, little has examined the records themselves, or their relationship to the people they represent. In this article I take a novel tact, treating criminal records as the material, textual documentations of an individual's past. I then observe expungement seekers—people who encounter their own records—to understand their reactions. From this data, I use inductive theories of symbolic interactionism to theorize another collateral effect of the criminal record: it represents people in ways that depersonalize their social identities, and prevents them from communicating corrective self‐understandings to the governing bodies that author the records. I conclude with my main theoretical contribution: “having a criminal record,” literally, means having a textual proxy that the state has authored on its own terms, without input from the people whom it permanently represents, and while concealing from those people the apparatus behind authorship. As a consequence, the criminal records system serves as a barrier to reciprocal communication between ex‐arrestees and a legal system that represents them in ways that they may want to contest. This “wrongful representation” is a collateral effect of having a criminal record that impedes the ability of ex‐arrestees to manage or repair their relationship with the state that has punished them.     

INDEFINITE PUNISHMENT AND THE CRIMINAL RECORD: STIGMA REPORTS AMONG EXPUNGEMENT‐SEEKERS IN ILLINOIS*

Although criminal records in the United States are more publicly accessible than ever before, we lack knowledge about how record‐bearers seek to overcome the negative consequences associated with a visible criminal record as they apply for jobs, housing, and financial aid. Furthermore, although criminal histories record all arrests—and not just those that result in conviction—researchers have yet to compare how those with more extensive versus minor criminal records cope with criminal record stigma. We present interview data from a comparative study of expungement‐seekers (N = 53) who have petitioned the courts to remove their criminal records from public view. One group had extensive criminal records (46 percent); the other group had more minor criminal records (54 percent). Several key findings emerged. First, both groups of participants tried, but failed, to persuade potential employers and landlords to overlook the criminal record. They also faced restricted educational opportunity. Second, participants in both groups expressed distress that criminal justice contact could follow them throughout their lives, subjecting them to ongoing stigma. However, those with extensive versus minor criminal records offered different rationales explaining why the visible criminal record history unfairly burdened them. Implications for reintegration theory and policy are discussed.     

Criminal record stigma,race, and neighborhood inequality

Justice-involved people experience high levels of housing instability and residential mobility, making the housing search a recurrent part of life. Little is known, however, regarding how criminal record stigma functions in the rental housing market. This article examines how housing providers use criminal records to screen tenants in the rental housing market and whether it varies by type of neighborhood. I conduct an online correspondence audit to test discriminatory behaviors and find an adverse criminal record effect on housing opportunities. Many housing providers disqualify all tenants with a criminal record, even without information about the severity or timing of offenses. The criminal record effect is significantly stronger in gentrifying neighborhoods and in neighborhoods where the proportion of Black residents is dwindling. Tenant screening emerges as a central obstacle faced by the justice-involved population, vital to understanding the web of disadvantages that traps so many in the wake of the carceral state.     

论书面侦查说明的形式审查规则——在程序性裁判视野下的探讨

2013年《刑事诉讼法》及相关解释所构建的以非法证据排除和瑕疵证据补正为核心的程序性裁判,为侦查机关出具书面说明材料的适用设定了较大空间,悖离直接言辞原则,存在明显的正当性瑕疵。但侦查说明的适用,又在我国司法实践中具有一定的必要性与合理性,两种理念存在激烈的矛盾。就此,有必要根据程序性裁判的不同证明方式,试求形成侦查说明从底限规范性到精密规范性的多层级规范性阶梯,进而确立其审查与排除规则。借此,以精密的形式性规则,弥补侦查说明的公正性瑕疵,弥合其理论正当性与实践合理性之间的鸿沟。     

侦查实验笔录简论

侦查实验是指侦查人员在刑事诉讼过程中按照科学的原则和方法,在模拟案件原有条件基础上所设计、实施的．旨在查明与案件有关的事实的存在、发生的可能性或其状态、过程的法科学活动。侦查实验笔录是侦查实验过程及结论的载体．是侦查人员按照法定格式制作的,用于描述和证明实验过程中发生的具有法律意义的事实状况的书面记录。在证据法学视野内...     

Evaluating the impact of prior record on judges' sentencing decisions: A seven-city comparison

There is much agreement among social scientists that the prior criminal records of defendants are important in explaining the sentences given by judges. That being so, it is crucial to control for prior record when examining sentence discrepancies, such as between black and white defendants. However, when examining sentencing patterns, a remarkable variety of indicators has been used to measure prior record. It is very likely that different measures of prior record have different relationships to sentencing. Only fragmentary evidence of these differential relationships has been offered, however. We will add to our knowledge about the efficacy of different measures of prior record by examining numerous measures and analyzing their relationship to sentences levied on black and white defendants. Data from seven cities will be used in the analysis in order to try to understand the variation that might exist in these relationships.     

An Exploration of the Historical Background of Criminal Record Checking in the United Kingdom: From the Eighteenth to the Twenty-First Century

Potentially preventable crimes resulting from failures in criminal record checking and recording emerged as problematic in the eighteenth century and have continued up until the present day. Ranging from child abuse to murders, reports suggest that if criminal records had been evident, in some cases unlawful acts may have been prohibited. The historical background to the emergence of criminal record collection and checking in the United Kingdom (UK) is analysed from the mid-eighteenth century. This time period is chosen because it marks a pivotal change in the treatment of criminals, crimes and the start of the policing system in the United Kingdom. As a result of growing societal concerns over public safety and changes in the legal system, the approach in which criminal records have been utilised in employment decision-making has evolved most rapidly in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. The recording, storing and sharing of criminal record information has received most attention only in the past decade. Developments in recruitment-vetting procedures for the protection of vulnerable persons have only emerged in the last 50 years to manage such crimes in the United Kingdom. In 2002 the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) was established in the United Kingdom to ensure safer recruitment decisions could be made in society. However, the question remains whether or not these practices have been and are effective.     

Employer aversion to criminal records: An experimental study of mechanisms

The mark of a criminal record is clearly harmful for employment. The reasons for employer aversion, however, are not well established even though legal, policy, and scholarly responses rely on particular explanations. We propose that explanations for aversion often fit under a repetition risk framework in which employers use records as neutral sources of information about prior illegal activity and make decisions to minimize risk of similar future conduct. A second explanation is stigma, in which the records themselves, independent of conduct, trigger stereotypes, status loss, and discrimination. Using an experimental employer survey, we find that employers evaluate applicants with records more negatively than they do applicants with similar behavior signaled through non-criminal-justice sources (e.g., social media); this effect remains after accounting for predictions about future conduct. It is also most apparent among higher status jobs rather than among manual labor jobs, and it persists after adjusting for firm-level and legal constraints. We conclude that aversion reflects not only repetition risk but also the stigma of criminal justice contact. Insofar as criminal record screening is not exclusively a form of rational risk management, this finding may lead to altered assessments of the benefits of screening relative to the costs of perpetuating inequality produced by the criminal justice system.     

论英国的犯罪信息公开制度——以加拉格尔案为切入点

在英国,犯罪信息公开制度一直是一个备受争议的话题。《欧洲人权公约》第8条规定,每个人都享有隐私权,任何侵犯隐私权的行为必须以“合法”和“必要”为前提。2019年初,在加拉格尔系列案的上诉程序中,犯罪记录披露措施是否违反《公约》第8条规定成为英国社会关注的焦点。在该案判决中,英国最高法院虽然支持了前科被披露人员的请求,驳回了上诉,但是,法官们对于犯罪信息公开制度是否符合合法性和必要性标准却存在明显的分歧。通过对该案的基本案情、主要争议点、英国最高法院法官的不同意见的分析,可以为发展和完善我国犯罪记录登记和查询机制提供参考依据。