中国语境下的媒介审判———以程序正义为视角简

媒体介入刑事审判更多地是对审判独立形成了一种干预,社会舆论的日益自由化和一定程度的不可控性,极易引起党政机关领导及国家司法行政机关的关注,转而对法官依照事实和法律独立地形成心证作出裁断产生干扰.但不可否认的是,媒介审判以其刚性的表征客观上也起到了其本质上监督审判运行的作用,对于现阶段完善我国的审判监督机制具有着某种意义上的积极作用.     

大学生消费行为与家庭背景的关系——基于在杭高校的调查

当今大学生是一个庞大而特殊的消费群体,在社会各方面因素的影响下,他们的消费心理、消费观念、消费方式等也不尽相同。然而,由于大学生还未迈入社会,他们的经济主要来源于家庭,是纯粹的消费者,属于＂寄生型＂消费者。本文主要通过对当前在杭高校大学生消费现状及其家庭背景的调查,分别探讨他们的消费行为与其家庭背景之间存在的相关关系。     

我国刑事简易程序的变化与作用——以加拿大作为比较样本

自新《刑事诉讼法》颁布之后,随之而来的是一系列配套规定的补充修改。在这一轮刑事诉讼法律规定的大变革中,刑事简易程序的改革无疑是众多亮点和重点之一。以加拿大的刑事法律制度作为参考系,我国刑事简易程序中似乎可以找到与之相对应的印记。不过,我国修改之后的刑事简易程序并未照搬照抄国外的相关规定,而是秉持西学东渐的态度,在尊重刑事诉讼结构与基本原理的基础之上,发挥着提高诉讼效率和保障被追诉人诉讼权利的双重作用。需要指出的是,我国刑事简易程序仍存在一些值得进一步斟酌的地方。对这些不足之处的完善,将有益于其更好地发挥双重作用。     

论刑事侦查程序中捕后羁押必要性审查

捕后羁押必要性审查是刑事诉讼法修改的亮点之一。它是尊重和保障人权意识的司法实践,也让我们对于羁押措施的适用进行了新审视、重组合和再设计。从刑诉法修改的视角对捕后羁押必要性审查制度的实施困境进行分析,并对审查主体、审查内容、审查标准等实体要件及审查启动方式、审查模式等程序要件进行理论探索,对于司法实践是有裨益的。     

专家参与刑事司法的多元功能及其体系化

从1979年刑事诉讼法颁布至今,专家参与我国刑事司法的制度功能变得开放而多元。专家制度功能的多元化,根源于刑事司法的三重逻辑:弥合法律人与专家之间知识鸿沟的“认知逻辑”;落实公检法机关“分工负责,互相配合,互相制约”原则的“权力逻辑”;保障当事人合法权益与实现控辩平等的“权利逻辑”。从结构主义与整体主义的视角看,当前,刑事专家制度存在明显的体系化缺陷,主要表现为专家制度过度权力化、专家制度功能尚未结构化、专家制度不够规范化。改进刑事专家制度,应当采取体系化路径:首先,将多元专家参与模式调整为鉴定人与专家辅助人二元专家模式;其次,彰显专家制度的“权利逻辑”,矫正过度权力化倾向;最后,构建系统化的专家制度,为专家服务刑事司法创造制度条件。     

《监察法》与《刑法》衔接实施的基点、问题与路径

基于《监察法》的宪法性法律地位和全面依法治国方略等理论基点,《监察法》的有效实施需《刑法》与之有机衔接。然而,《刑法》在相应职务犯罪主体及相关犯罪对象、罪名体系、刑罚配置和认罪认罚从宽规定等方面,存在与《监察法》不相对接的诸多问题,使得依《监察法》意图实现的监察全覆盖等目标难以实现,并会滋生新的权力滥用风险。《监察法》与《刑法》衔接实施以上问题的有效解决,应是基于以上理论基点,通过法律解释和刑法修正的路径,完善《刑法》相应规定的司法适用规则和立法规范设置。     

刑法现代化理论的续造

根据党的十九届四中全会决议,在国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的背景下,刑法现代化需要继续发展。反观我国刑法学领域,现代化刑法的追求还占据着当代刑法学人的思维,遮蔽了中国刑法现代化之未来图景的真实面貌,妨碍了中国刑法现代化的进一步发展。为此,我们有必要从现代性的一般特征出发,尝试着以现代之后的视角看待刑法现代化发展及其遭遇的“陷阱”。在对现代性中的基础主义、表象主义,以及普遍主义的批判基础上,实现现代刑法经由自由刑法向风险刑法、单一法典化向立法多样化和实践理性向交往理性三个维度的转化,并为中国刑法的现代化事业提供更为充足的理论动力。     

涉黑涉恶案件审判警务保障风险解析与防控

涉黑涉恶案件审判的特殊性决定了司法警察警务保障风险表现为:未能将被告人安全、及时押解至法院,未能对羁押待审被告人实施有效看守、管理,未能保障法庭的正常审判秩序和人员安全,未能规范执行警务。为减少涉黑涉恶案件审判警务保障风险,司法警察应树立预防为主、艺术决策、多举并进、以警为本的防控理念,并加强远程押解、院外审判看管和值庭、规范化执法风险的防控措施。     

Does gang membership pay? Illegal and legal earnings through emerging adulthood*

Gang membership is believed to impede success in the legitimate economic market while simultaneously supporting success in the illegal market. We extend the study of the economic effects of gang membership by using a within‐ and between‐individual analytic design, decomposing gang membership into multiple statuses (i.e., entering a gang, continuously in a gang, leaving a gang, and inactive gang membership), examining legal and illegal earnings simultaneously, and accounting for factors endogenous to gang membership that may contribute to economic achievement. By using panel data from 1,213 individuals who participated in the Pathways to Desistance Study to conduct a multilevel path analysis, we find that active gang membership status is unrelated to legal earnings. Alternatively, entering a gang is associated with increased illegal earnings, attributable to changes in delinquent peers and drug use, whereas leaving a gang has a direct relationship with decreased illegal earnings. Our results indicate that the positive economic effect of gang membership (i.e., illegal earnings and total earnings) is short‐lived and that, on balance, the sum of the gang membership experience does not “pay” in terms of overall earnings.     

The Moderating Effect of Criminal Thinking on Certainty of Apprehension in Decisions to Engage in Antisocial Behavior: Replication and Extension

This study explored whether the rational (certainty of punishment) and nonrational (criminal thinking) aspects of antisocial decision‐making interact. A convenience sample of 319 undergraduates (106 men, 213 women) completed a measure of criminal thinking and responded to three fictional vignettes (i.e., cheating on a final examination in a class they were in jeopardy of failing, stealing $50 off a table in a dorm room, and selling marijuana for a friend) at three different levels of risk or certainty of apprehension (50%, 10%, and 1%). Results indicated that participants reported that they would be more likely to engage in antisocial behavior when the certainty of getting caught was low and the level of proactive (P) or reactive (R) criminal thinking was high. An interaction between certainty and criminal thinking was also observed in which the gap between lower and higher criminal thinking respondents grew as the probability of getting caught fell.