对原告或第三人提出其在行政程序中没有提出的反驳理由或证据问题的处理

原告或者第三人在行政诉讼中提出因客观原因未能在行政程序中收集、提出的证据以及在行政程序完成后为驳倒具体行政行为而收集的证据 ,人民法院应当允许被告补充相关证据 ;被告补充的证据只能用来反驳原告或者第三人的证据而不得证明具体行政行为的合法性 ;对于原告或者第三人提出的反驳理由或者证据 ,法庭应当从关联性、真实性和合法性等方面审核。     

试论安全审计对计算机犯罪的追踪取证

当前计算机犯罪日益严重,计算机网络中安全审计系统能事前控制人员或设备的访问行为,并能事后获得直接电子证据,充分利用安全审计功能是对计算机犯罪进行追踪取证的有效方法。而安全审计的策略、措施直接影响审计效果。     

电子商务仲裁法律问题研究

电子商务的迅速发展使仲裁解决其纠纷成为必要,但和一般的民商事仲裁相比,电子商务仲裁有许多法律问题需要解决。本文即对电子商务仲裁所面临的若干法律问题,诸如电子仲裁协议的法律效力、电子商务证据效力、电子商务仲裁适用的法律等进行了深入的研究。     

刑事鉴定之程序维度

在程序维度,司法鉴定在刑事诉讼中一般要经历决定利用科学的辅助、选定适格的鉴定人员、检材送交鉴定机构进行分析、明确鉴定事项和要求、进行科学检验、提交鉴定结论、审前开示鉴定结论以及审查评断鉴定结论科学性等几大环节。     

耳纹证据的多伯特审查--通过判例解读《联邦证据规则》之科学证据规则

耳纹作为一种科学证据在欧洲几个国家最早出现并得到应用,最近又进入了对科学证据要求最为严格的美国法庭.但是耳纹并没有成为普遍适用的证据形式.美国的多伯特规则对科学证据做出了详细的审查规定,耳纹证据面对<联邦证据规则>必然要接受一次考验.耳纹证据究竟能否像指纹、工具痕迹、笔迹检验等一样,成为法庭科学界公认的证据并得以广泛应用,还有待进一步考证.涉及耳纹证据的判例引发了耳纹能否作为科学证据使用的讨论,美国的科学证据规则对这场讨论起到了决定性作用.     

论具体行政行为作为民事诉讼证据

确认性行政行为和许可性行政行为等具体行政行为往往成为民事诉讼的重要证据,司法实践中对它们的处理方法各不相同,各有缺陷。民事诉讼和行政诉讼对具体行政行为的审查必须有所区别,具体行政行为作为证据在民事案件中出现,它的性质只能是民事证据,对它的审查也只能按照民事证据的规则进行。     

Meeting a Forensic Podiatry Admissibility Challenge: A Daubert Case Study

This article is an introduction to the United States Supreme Court's standard of admissibility of forensic evidence and testimony at trial, known as the Daubert standard, with emphasis on how this standard applies to the field of forensic podiatry. The author, a forensic podiatrist, provided law enforcement with evidence tying a bloody sock‐clad footprint found at the scene of a homicide to the suspect. In 2014, the author testified at a pretrial hearing, known as “a Daubert hearing,” to address the admissibility of this evidence in court. This was the first instance of forensic podiatry being the primary subject of a Daubert hearing. The hearing resulted in the court ordering this evidence admissible. The expert's testimony contributed to the suspect's conviction. This article serves as a reference for forensic podiatrists and experts in similar fields that involve impression evidence, providing evidentiary standards and their impact on expert evidence and testimony.     

测谎在台湾地区为被告有利证明方法的检讨

台湾地区司法实务上使用测谎鉴定作为辅佐证据的情形相当普遍。法源主要依据台湾地区“刑事诉讼法”第161-1条：“被告得就被诉事实指出有利之证明方法。”此所指之证明方法没有绝对严格的限制,目的在发现真实、保障被告人权,故而台湾地区法院认可经被告同意施测之测谎结果具有证据能力。然而,测谎在台湾地区现已演进成“反客为主”的现象,刑事被告主动要求测谎,并且主张以测谎通过之结果作为被诉事实有利的证明;反之,未通过测谎的被告则上诉质疑测谎结果的可靠性,致使法院过去对于测谎结果多采肯定说之态度起了变化。相较于刑事案件,“民事诉讼法”第355条第1项明文：“文书,依其程序及意旨得认作公文书者,推定为真正。”致被告于民事庭审援引测谎鉴定报告的情形亦不遑多让。测谎成为被告另类脱罪、卸责的手段,对于台湾地区司法实务长期依赖测谎之使用,预料产生冲击与警惕之意义。实有重新检讨测谎作为证明方法之必要。     

Identifying background microbiomes in an evidence recovery laboratory: A preliminary study

16S rRNA profiling of bacterial communities may have forensic utility in the identification or association of individuals involved with criminal activities. Microbial profiling of evidence may, in the future, be performed within environments currently utilised for human DNA recovery, such as a forensic biology laboratory. It would be important to establish the background microbiome of such an environment to determine the potential presence of human or environmental microbial signatures to assist forensic scientists in the appropriate interpretation of target microbial communities. This study sampled various surfaces of an Evidence Recovery Laboratory (ERL) on three occasions including (a) before a monthly deep-clean, (b) immediately following the deep-clean, and (c) immediately after the laboratory’s use by a single participant for the purposes of routine item examinations. Microbial profiles were also generated for the involved participant and researcher for comparison purposes. Additionally, human nuclear DNA was profiled for each of the samples collected, using standard forensic profiling techniques, to provide a prospective link to the presence or absence of a background microbial signature within the ERL after its use. Taxonomic distributions across ERL samples revealed no consistent signature of any of the items sampled over time, however, major phyla noted within all ERL samples across the three timepoints were consistent with those found in human skin microbiomes. PCoA plots based on the Unweighted Unifrac metric revealed some clustering between participant microbial reference samples and surfaces of the ERL after use, suggesting that despite a lack of direct contact, and adherence to standard operating procedures (SOPs) suitable for human DNA recovery, microbiomes may be deposited into a forensic setting over time. The reference samples collected from the involved participant and researcher generated full STR profiles. Human DNA was observed to varying degrees in samples taken from the ERL across each of the sampling timepoints. There was no correlation observed between samples that contained or did not contain detectable quantities of human nuclear DNA and microbial profile outputs.     

Bloodstain pattern analysis & Bayes: A case report

The findings from a bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) may assist in formulating or falsifying scenarios that are considered in the investigative stages of a criminal investigation. When a case proceeds to trial the bloodstain pattern expert may be asked about the relevance of their findings given scenarios that are proposed by the prosecution and defense counsel. Such opinions provided by an expert are highly relevant to police investigation or legal proceedings, but the reasoning behind the opinion or implicit assumptions made by the expert may not be transparent.A proper framework for the evaluation of forensic findings has been developed since the late twentieth century, based on the hierarchy of propositions, Bayesian reasoning and a model for case assessment and interpretation. This framework, when implemented in casework, mitigates some of the risks of cognitive biases, and makes the reasoning and scientific basis for the opinion transparent. This framework is broadly used across forensic science disciplines. In this paper we describe its application to the field of BPA using a case example from the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI).