完善司法鉴定制度是科学证据时代的呼唤

司法鉴定是现代司法证明活动中查明案件事实的一种重要方法和手段.现代司法鉴定是司法证明方法进步的结果和体现.科学技术的进步使司法证明方法发生了两次重大的转变.以物证及其相关的鉴定结论等证据构成的"科学证据",应该成为司法证明最主要的手段.物证虽然是客观实在的,但其自身不能直接证明案件事实,需要人们的认识.司法鉴定是人们认识物证的途径.司法鉴定水平的提高可以帮助发现更多潜在的证据.科学技术是司法鉴定的生命.科学技术的进步是促进司法鉴定发展的最重要因素.司法鉴定制度改革应与审判体制改革相适应.司法鉴定制度改革应与证据法律制度相协调,既要赋予法官对鉴定结论的自由裁量权,又要对司法鉴定制度进行规范.司法鉴定制度改革应以提供"科学证据"为出发点,需要鉴定人出庭、技术方法标准化和建立行业协会等措施.     

Unanalyzed evidence in law-enforcement agencies

Research Summary This study investigated forensic evidence processing in a nationally representative sample of state and local law-enforcement agencies (n = 3,153). For a 5-year period, agencies reported that 14% of all unsolved homicides (an estimated 3,975 cases) and 18% of all unsolved rapes (an estimated 27,595 cases) contained forensic evidence that had not been submitted to a forensic crime laboratory for analysis. Approximately 40% of these unanalyzed homicide and rape cases were reported to have contained DNA evidence. The lack of a suspect in the case was the most frequently cited reason for not submitting forensic evidence for analysis. Policy Implications Despite an increased diffusion of knowledge regarding the value of forensic evidence in the prosecution and defense of criminal cases, the investigative capabilities of forensic science are not being realized by law enforcement. Additional training for law enforcement on the use of forensic science to develop investigative leads is critical, as is the creation of departmental policies that prioritize and streamline the analysis of forensic evidence for homicide and rape cases—even in “no-suspect” cases. Ensuring adequate resources and information sharing for forensic processing especially of violent crimes, is also critical.     

Public beliefs about the accuracy and importance of forensic evidence in the United States

Recent advances in forensic science, especially the use of DNA technology, have revealed that faulty forensic analyses may have contributed to miscarriages of justice. In this study we build on recent research on the general public’s perceptions of the accuracy of 10 forensic science techniques and of each stage in the investigation process. We find that individuals in the United States hold a pessimistic view of the forensic science investigation process, believing that an error can occur about half of the time at each stage of the process. We find that respondents believe that forensics are far from perfect, with accuracy rates ranging from a low of 55% for voice analysis to a high of 83% for DNA analysis, with most techniques being considered between 65% and 75% accurate. Nevertheless, respondents still believe that forensic evidence is a key part of a criminal case, with nearly 30% of respondents believing that the absence of forensic evidence is sufficient for a prosecutor to drop the case and nearly 40% believing that the presence of forensic evidence – even if other forms of evidence suggest that the defendant is not guilty – is enough to convict the defendant.     

电子物证检验

目的阐述电子物证检验技术的专业内容和组成,以及开展电子物证检验的作用和重要意义;方法研究美国、欧洲和国内电子证据及其检验鉴定的数据资料,结合国内物证检验技术发展现状和需求,论证电子物证检验技术;结果提出了电子物证检验定义、检验对象、技术方法、特点作用以及尽快在国内建立电子物证检验专业等观点;结论电子物证检验是关于识别、发现、提取、保存、恢复、展示、分析和鉴定电子设备中存在的电子信息(电子证据)的科学技术,其检验结果可以作案件侦查线索或法庭证据。开展电子物证检验可以有效提高犯罪侦查效率。     

用于证据评价的似然比模型

本文介绍了似然比（Likelihood Ratios，LR）如何能够用以衡量司法鉴定学证据的强度。解释了为什么司法鉴定界专家不能回答诸如“这是谁干的？”这样的终极问题，但可以给出证据强度的度量值。文章随后描述了近来开发的LR分析模型的概况，包括迄今尚未彻底解决的问题。     

Wrongful convictions and claims of false or misleading forensic evidence

The results are reported of a study to examine case factors associated with 732 wrongful convictions classified by the National Registry of Exonerations as being associated with “False or Misleading Forensic Evidence.” A forensic error typology has been developed to provide a structure for the categorization and coding of factors relating to misstatements in forensic science reports; errors of individualization or classification; testimony errors; issues relating to trials and officers of the court; and evidence handling and reporting issues. This study, which included the analysis of 1391 forensic examinations, demonstrates that most errors related to forensic evidence are not identification or classification errors by forensic scientists. When such errors are made, they are frequently associated with incompetent or fraudulent examiners, disciplines with an inadequate scientific foundation, or organizational deficiencies in training, management, governance, or resources. More often, forensic reports or testimony miscommunicate results, do not conform to established standards, or fail to provide appropriate limiting information. Just as importantly, actors within the broader criminal justice system—but not under the purview of any forensic science organization—may contribute to errors that may be related to the forensic evidence. System issues include reliance on presumptive tests without confirmation by a forensic laboratory, use of independent experts outside the administrative control of public laboratories, inadequate defense, and suppression or misrepresentation of forensic evidence by investigators or prosecutors. In approximately half of wrongful convictions analyzed, improved technology, testimony standards, or practice standards may have prevented a wrongful conviction at the time of trial.     

物证鉴定中的物证污染问题

物证污染是影响物证鉴定结果的最重要因素之一,它会损害物证鉴定结论质量甚至造成错误的鉴定结论。随着以法医DNA检验为代表的物证鉴定技术检验灵敏度的提高,物证污染出现的可能性及其造成的危害程度都显著增加。物证污染有多种形式和来源,可能发生在犯罪现场或实验室。采取适当的污染防范措施可以有效降低物证污染发生的可能性,及时监测和发现物证污染可以将污染造成的危害降到最低。     

美国法庭科学证据的应用与发展

＂法庭科学＂萌芽于古代中国,兴盛于近现代西方国家,最终发展成为具备完整科学体系的现代意义上的法庭科学学科。法庭科学证据的应用与发展显然与法庭科学的发展与应用密切相关,它们相互制约,相互促进。美国司法制度中关于法庭科学证据的证明力、可信度、可采性的分立质疑对法庭科学本身的发展无疑起到鞭策与促进作用。美国法庭科学证据的司法制度以及常用的一些传统与高技术法庭科学证据的使用过程中存在的许多问题,理解法庭科学证据标准,对我国法庭科学及其证据的研究与应用有所启迪。     

Identifying and measuring juror pre-trial bias for forensic evidence: development and validation of the Forensic Evidence Evaluation Bias Scale

Abstract

Previous research has provided support for the impact of juror pre-trial bias on judicial decision making, particularly in cases where the evidence presented at trial is of weak or ambiguous probative value. In an effort to identify whether a pre-trial bias for forensic evidence exists, the Forensic Evidence Evaluation Bias Scale (FEEBS) was developed and tested. The results of a principal components analysis suggested that two distinct constructs were being measured, corresponding to a pro-prosecution and pro-defence bias toward forensic evidence. In a second validation study, scores on these two subscales were compared with other existing juror bias measures (Juror Bias Scale and Belief in a Just World) and in a mock juror decision making task only the pro-prosecution subscale of the FEEBS predicted the perceived strength of forensic evidence. A partial mediation model is presented which explains the relationship between this bias and verdict preferences. The implications of this potential juror bias are discussed in the context of real juries, the CSI Effect (which refers to anecdotal claims that jurors are biased by the popularity of fictional representations of forensic science on television) and peremptory challenges, as well as future research directions.     

德国司法鉴定在司法中的运作及其借鉴

本文作者曾有幸参加国家外国专家局与司法部司法鉴定管理局联合组织的德国司法鉴定培训班。此文以考察见闻为基础，结合文献资料，对德国法院系统在司法审判中运用司法鉴定的实际状况进行较全面的考察。并结合中国目前司法鉴定改革的现状，提出一些个人建议。     

Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part II--judicial reasoning in decisions to exclude forensic identification evidence on grounds of reliability

Many studies regarding the legal status of forensic science have relied on the U.S. Supreme Court's mandate in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., and its progeny in order to make subsequent recommendations or rebuttals. This paper focuses on a more pragmatic approach to analyzing forensic science's immediate deficiencies by considering a qualitative analysis of actual judicial reasoning where forensic identification evidence has been excluded on reliability grounds since the Daubert precedent. Reliance on general acceptance is becoming insufficient as proof of the admissibility of forensic evidence. The citation of unfounded statistics, error rates and certainties, a failure to document the analytical process or follow standardized procedures, and the existence of observe bias represent some of the concerns that have lead to the exclusion or limitation of forensic identification evidence. Analysis of these reasons may serve to refocus forensic practitioners' testimony, resources, and research toward rectifying shortfalls in these areas.     

论民事诉讼中重新鉴定乱象的治理--以《民事诉讼证据规定》(2019版)为契机

司法鉴定意见是民事诉讼领域重要的科学证据。开展鉴定活动时,司法鉴定人有可能因程序性或技术性问题而向法庭出具有问题的鉴定,导致当事人的合法权益受损。重新鉴定作为问题鉴定的救济路径之一,是严重问题鉴定的高端技术性解决方案。法官与当事人不恰当使用重新鉴定手段来纠正问题鉴定,是引发民事诉讼中重新鉴定乱象的内因。而司法鉴定的行政管理与诉讼规则博弈所导致的管理盲区的出现,则是引发重新鉴定乱象的外因。《民事诉讼证据规定》(2019版)为重新鉴定乱象的治理带来了契机。一方面,通过"提出异议-书面答复-鉴定人出庭"的鉴定异议疏导路径,使重新鉴定回归恰当的救济地位;另一方面,基于"初次鉴定、庭审质证、重新鉴定"构建多元化的问题鉴定管理路径。这种合理的问题鉴定分流管理模式,不仅有望有效治理既往的重新鉴定乱象,而且即将打破知识壁垒、实现庭审实质化。     

物证鉴定证据应用层级论

用物证鉴定结论证明犯罪需要经过推理过程,将物证来源鉴定结论转化为嫌疑人行为推论,后者再作为法律事实证明嫌疑人是否有罪。物证鉴定证据应用的递进证明关系,可以用由依次推理关系连接的物证来源结论层、行为推论层和定罪层构成的物证鉴定层级模型描述。该模型可直观表达和评估物证鉴定结论证据应用效力。     

拉曼光谱技术在物证鉴定中的应用

拉曼光谱技术具有不接触样品、不破坏样品、无需样品制备等优点,适用于法庭科学领域不同种类物证的分析.本文综述了拉曼光谱技术在物证鉴定中的应用,并对该技术的发展趋势进行了展望.     

Questions,propositions and assessing different levels of evidence: Forensic voice comparison in practice

This paper contributes to the ongoing discussion about the distinction between observations and propositions in forensic inference, with a specific focus on forensic voice comparison casework conducted in the UK. We outline both linguistic and legal issues which make the evaluation of voice evidence and the refinement of propositions problematic in practice, and illustrate these using case examples. We will argue that group-level observations from the offender sample will always be evidential and that the value of this evidence must be determined by the expert. As such, a proposal is made that experts should, at least conceptually, think of voice evidence as having two levels, both with evidential value: group-level and individual-level. The two rely on different underlying assumptions, and the group-level observations can be used to inform the individual-level propositions. However, for the sake of interpretability, it is probably preferable to present only one combined conclusion to the end user. We also wish to reiterate points made in previous work: in providing conclusions, the forensic expert must acknowledge that the value of the evidence is dependent on a number of assumptions (propositions and background information) and these assumptions must be made clear and explicit to the user.     

Sexual violence perpetrated against women in India: the role of forensic evidence

ABSTRACT

In response to the upsurge in acts of sexual violence against women in India, Parliament passed the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of 2013, amending existing statutes and rules of evidence relating to crimes of sexual violence and the practices of forensic professionals in the country. While a step in the right direction, this law paid little attention to forensic evidence in sexual violence cases, which can provide a more objective, scientific account of events, aid in the reconstruction of crimes, and help strengthen cases against perpetrators. The objectives of this article are twofold: to raise awareness for the need for a more prominent role of forensic evidence in sexual violence cases and to recommend ways to establish uniform and comprehensive policies and procedures on the collection and preservation of forensic evidence in order to ensure that cases of sexual violence against women are heard in Indian courts.     

Digital evidence strategies for digital forensic science examinations

Given the size and complexity of many digital forensic science device examinations, there is a need for practitioners to formally and strategically determine a course of conduct which allows them to undertake the most robust and efficient examination possible. This work outlines both the need for practitioners to have a digital evidence strategy (DES) when tackling any given examination scenario, how to construct one and the concerns which exist when no formal DES is in place. Approaches to DES development are examined and the context to which they should be deployed are analysed, with focus being on the use of DESs at the examination/processing stage of the investigative workflow. Finally, a ‘DES skeleton’ is offered to guide practitioners as they seek to create their own DES.     

电子证据固定应急解决办法

电子证据固定是电子数据司法鉴定工作的开始,同时也是后续所有鉴定工作的基础,因此,电子证据固定工作是否科学、规范、合法、完整,将直接影响整个司法鉴定工作的结论。本文阐述在电子证据固定工作中,如何使用专用设备和软件对电子介质进行证据固定,以及在缺少专用设备的情况下的应急解决办法。     

Perceived infallibility of detection dog evidence: implications for juror decision-making

This study focuses on the trust that potential jurors have in unsubstantiated evidence and the implications of such trust for legal decision-making. We examined whether participants’ motivation to think deeply (‘need for cognition,’ NC) and belief in science moderated their trust in potentially fallible detection dog evidence when selecting a verdict in a trial scenario. A detection dog twice indicated the presence of drugs in the scenario, yet no drugs were actually found. Those who chose a guilty verdict without drugs present featured stronger beliefs in detection dog evidence. They were also more confident that a dog alert indicated the presence of drugs, even though the scientific literature actually shows that detection dog evidence is subject to biases and other challenges to reliability. Our findings indicate that an unsubstantiated belief and trust in detection dog evidence may negatively influence juror decision-making, which may, in turn, pose consequences for fairness and justice. Participants believed that detection dogs provide powerful and reliable evidence, and these beliefs were clearly associated with stronger beliefs in science. These findings, therefore, raise serious concerns about jurors’ indiscriminate trust in forensic evidence, be it detection dog evidence or other lines of evidence presented in court.