《加强美国法庭科学之路》的反响和启示

美国科学院国家研究顾问委员会2009年2月发布的《加强美国法庭科学之路》明确指出目前美国法庭科学领域的很多学科存在严重缺陷,不能很好地为司法审判服务。本文通过对该报告出台背景和一年多来的争论和反响进行分析,对其披露的问题和提出的建议进行了详细解读。目前其主要争议存在于设立独立的国家法庭科学研究院和隔离法庭科学机构与执法...     

意见证据规则要义——以美国为视角

意见证据规则是证据规则的重要组成部分。尽管意见证据规则在我国的立法层面已初步确立,但相关的理论研究仍然十分薄弱。鉴于意见证据规则在美国适用最为广泛,发展最为成熟,本文力图以美国为例,全面介绍意见证据规则的基本内容,分析其价值内涵、法理基础,阐释其适用的难点,探讨专家意见可靠性的属性定位,研究意见证据规则下终极问题原则基本被废弃的根本原因及专家意见受到的限制,进而就意见证据规则在我国的适用提出管见。     

浅谈笔迹鉴定结论的审查方法

笔迹鉴定结论作为一种法定证据,在司法实践中具有非常重要的地位。文章从笔迹鉴定及笔迹鉴定的性质入手,就司法实践中笔迹鉴定结论常用的审查方法进行了比较全面的阐述。     

标本兼治,解决“执行难”——民事强制执行法专家建议稿起草问题研究

制定独立的民事强制执行法是大势所趋、众望所归。民事强制执行法专家建议稿坚持“站在客观公正的立场 ,坚持按规律办事 ,确保既解决现实问题又适应长远发展”的指导思想 ,总结我国民事强制执行工作的经验 ,吸收域外立法的合理成份 ,构建了我国未来的民事强制执行制度。     

The Place for Custody Evaluations in Family Peacemaking

Custody evaluations can serve the dual purpose of providing neutral, objective information to the court while also contributing to the possibility of earlier settlement, which coincides with the therapeutic jurisprudence goal of more positive outcomes for children and families. Research suggests that most cases settle after custody evaluations. However, most of the literature is focused on the use of custody evaluations for litigation. Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health consultants can influence parents to focus more on children's needs and less on their conflict as they go through the evaluation process. This article urges family courts to develop processes and require professionals to learn skills needed for an interdisciplinary process to utilize evaluations in peacemaking.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• All custody evaluation processes should aim to reduce and/or shorten children's exposure to parental conflict.
• Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health professional consultants should use the evaluation process to influence parents to be more aware of their children's needs and less invested in their adversarial positions.
• Evaluators should learn to write and orally present information and state opinions with consideration of the parents themselves as consumers of the custody evaluation as well as the court.
• Attorneys and mental health professional consultants should help clients review the report, process their emotional reactions, and consider their options for settlement versus litigation in terms of emotional and financial costs to the family.
• Court processes should be developed to contain the time and cost of custody evaluations and provide dispute resolution after custody evaluations.

     

医疗损害鉴定意见存在问题与对策

鉴定意见作为专门性问题的鉴定结果,是诉讼案件得以正确处理的重要依据,其对诉讼结果的影响不言自明。鉴定意见不仅关乎证据制度,也涉及司法体系和诉讼程序。医疗领域的诉讼因裁判者囿于知识的局限,鉴定意见的作用更为突出。长期以来,鉴定问题已严重影响到司法裁判的效率与公正。本文通过梳理鉴定意见在医疗损害诉讼各环节中存在的问题,剖析鉴定方式、鉴定主体、文书内容以及审查采信方面等问题的成因,提出确立以自然人为中心的“鉴定人——专家辅助人”的“双翼”医疗损害鉴定人制度,规范鉴定意见内容和表述方式,完善质证程序等措施。     

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.     

新《民事证据规定》视角下鉴定人制度定位问题研究

鉴定人角色定位是鉴定人制度中的一个基本问题,它决定着鉴定人的制度设计及鉴定人在诉讼中的权利、义务以及责任的承担。从比较法角度看,英美法系国家的专家证人属于证人,具有党派性的特征。大陆法系国家在鉴定人角色定位问题上有不同的观点。通过梳理发现,这些观点可总结为证据方法说、证据调查说和折衷说三种。在我国,经过民事诉讼立法及相关司法解释的相继出台,鉴定人定位问题的脉络越来越清晰。2019年12月,新《民事证据规定》颁布,鉴定人定位的明晰成为理解、适用新《民事证据规定》鉴定人制度的前提。术语上的届分、内容上的区别是制度完善的基础,"双重属性"下其他专家制度的配套适用也是问题解决的路径。     

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.