刑事诉讼视野下的法医物证应用研究

法医物证在刑事诉讼中发挥着多种功能,但目前实践中对法医物证的有效发现、提取、保管、检验鉴定及应用的技术规范和证据规则尚不完善。本文从技术规范、诉讼程序以及证据应用的角度发掘法医物证应用的规律性内容,用以指导实践部门提高法医物证的发现、提取、检出的比率以及法医物证在刑事审判中的采用率及证明力,从而较好地解决定案证据的来源和案件事实的认定问题,并避免因法医物证错用而导致的错案。     

家事诉讼中法院证据调查制度研究——以我国诉讼模式的转换为背景

在我国立法和司法实践中,并没有明确家事诉讼与一般民事诉讼的区别,缺乏对家事诉讼的特殊性的考虑,尤其是在证据调查领域。在当事人主义诉讼模式下,当事人在举证不能或者遇到困难时,缺乏救济的方式和途径,法院也严格遵循一般民事纠纷的举证原则,不予主动调查。同时,法官的依职权介入容易被指责为职权主义的回归,从而有违法官中立的原则。在我国民事诉讼模式转型的背景下,家事诉讼中法院证据调查权不仅从实质正义的视角出发促进了中立原则的实现,而且弥补了当事人主义诉讼模式存在的缺陷。     

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.     

中医医疗技术损害侵权鉴定中的证据审查分析简

近些年,随着全民养生保健意识的逐步提高,选择中医治疗的患者越来越多,接踵而来的是因中医医疗技术损害引起纠纷的案件数量的攀升。但目前国内外大多数都是按照西医治疗的标准进行鉴定,一直未形成具有针对性、系统性、统一性的中医医疗纠纷鉴定的标准与原则。本文中,作者旨在结合《侵权责任法》中医疗技术损害责任的相关规定,阐述中医辨证论治的特点,审查分析中医医疗技术纠纷鉴定中的相关证据。     

证据法学研究用语不规范问题初探

法学研究强调逻辑的严谨性以及语言的规范性,作为法学分支学科的证据法学当然亦莫能外。但是,近年来方兴起的证据法学科,在我国开展的时日尚短,且一直与传统的证据学学科之间纠缠不清,以至于我国证据法学的学科体系迟迟不能建立,甚至连作为学科基础的基本概念都未能达成共识,缺乏统一性和规范性,理论研究和证据实务中用语不规范的问题一直存在,混用、误用基本概念和术语的现象较为普遍。这不仅影响到理论研究的严谨性,甚至干扰到实务操作的实效性。     

陪审制的分权机制与证据法的发展

针对我国人民陪审员制目前面临的“陪而不审”、“审而不议”之晋遍困境,本文探讨了西方国家陪审制产生和发展的过程,认识到“分权是陪审制成长的基本条件”;详细探讨了我国“陪而不审”、“审而不议”现象的主要形态,指出没有实行分权是造成这种困窘局面的根源;讨论了正在兴起的河南人民陪审圆制度的进步意义与局限性;主张我国应当建立以分权为首要特征的人民陪审员制度,为此需要立法机关制定有关陪审团如何与法官分享裁判权的制度,其中最关键的是制定证据法和陪审团法。     

Fingerprint comparison evidence has been under sustained attack in the United States of America for the last number of years: Is the critique with regard to reliability sufficiently penetrating to warrant the exclusion of this valuable evidence?

The decision in Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals 509 US 579 (1993) brought about renewed attention to and scrutiny of fingerprint comparison evidence in the United States of America. In terms of the decision courts were to act as the gatekeepers with respect to the admissibility of scientific expert evidence. This article describes these events and investigates the grounds upon which challenges were made to fingerprint comparison evidence in the courts, as well as the position that was taken by the courts. The article also considers the fundamental test for the admission of expert evidence, and whether the critique pointed out by the defendants in the cases with regard to reliability are sufficiently penetrating to warrant the exclusion of fingerprint comparison evidence.     

专家辅助人出庭质证规则研究

现代科学技术的迅猛发展对司法审判产生了巨大的影响,各种科学问题、技术证据、鉴定意见呈现于法庭,法官在审判案件中由于知识和经验的局限性而难以判断,在此背景下专家辅助人制度应运而生。英美法系有专家证人制度,存在完善的以交叉询问为主的专家证人出庭质证规则,大陆法系国家和地区有诉讼辅助人制度,虽然立法中没有明确的出庭质证规则,但是有完善的鉴定人出庭质证规则。我国当前专家辅助人出庭质证规则没有明确的规定,但准用证人出庭质证规则。不过目前缺乏进一步的理论阐述,且简单直接适用也存在问题,同时缺乏系统的、具体的、具有可操作性的质证规则。对此笔者提出构建专家辅助人出庭质证规则的建议。     

The role of alternative hypotheses in reducing bias in forensic medical experts’ decision making

Medical opinions are often essential evidence in criminal cases but relatively little is known about the factors that impact forensic doctors’ decision making. This research examines the role and impact of having an alternative hypothesis while forming a medical opinion. A scenario-based experiment with forensic doctors (n = 20) was conducted. In two out of three scenarios, the existence of alternative hypotheses impacted the actual opinions reached, the confidence in the judgments and the perceived consistency with the plaintiff hypothesis. Investigative and legal actors should be aware of the possibility of biases and importance of having alternative hypotheses when requesting and evaluating medical opinions.