论同案犯罪嫌疑人、被告人口供的证据价值

同案犯罪嫌疑人、被告人口供是否具有证据价值,我国法学界与司法实践中对此问题存在不同认识。无论是国外法律,还是我国刑诉法的相关理论,都肯定了其证据的价值在于:一、从定案的角度,只有同案人的口供,没有其它证据证实,不能认定被告人有罪;二、从补充证据的角度,同案被告人的口供在任何情意下都具有相应的价值。     

非法证据排除规则诉讼价值的冲突与抉择

非法证据排除规则应确立一个多元化的程序价值体系 ,在具备程序性价值和工具性价值的同时 ,还应尽可能地保证司法资源的合理配置。在不同诉讼价值之间发生冲突时 ,应不将实体真实作为刑事诉讼的唯一目标 ,也不再将“有罪必罚”作为刑事诉讼的最高目标 ,但同时应注意将排除规则对程序公正的追求和对当事人的权利的保护保持在一定限度之内。     

Evidence of Atrocities or Atrocious Use of Evidence: The Controversial Use of Atrocity Film at Nuremberg

This article focuses upon the utilisation of film evidence in criminal proceedings. It describes and evaluates the historical deployment of this type of material at War Crimes Trials, with particular emphasis upon the International Military Tribunal established at Nuremberg, in 1945, in the wake of the Second World War. During this Trial, the prosecution placed reliance upon the film, Nazi Concentration Camps, depicting with graphic realism the horrific barbarism of the Nazi regime. However, this was only made possible by the implementation of innovatory evidential procedures, effectively circumventing the hearsay rule. A comparison is drawn between this, and the current position in England and Wales, following the recent relaxation of the traditional embargo upon hearsay evidence. However, film evidence of the type adduced at Nuremberg may be more prejudicial than probative and should such circumstances arise, the interests of justice may not truly be served. Susan Twist is Senior Lecturer in Law at the Lancashire Law School, University of Central Lancashire. smtwist@uclan.ac.uk. The author was assisted in research for this article by the dissertation of Kellie Goggins.     

共犯被告人之间供述一致定案能力分析——兼析我国刑事诉讼法第四十六条

共犯被告人之间的供述相互印证,但无其他证据佐证能否定案是目前法学界与司法实践中的一个难点.从我国刑事诉讼法第46条的内涵人手,论证该条中的"被告人供述"仅指证明对象被告人本人的供述,共犯被告人供述是该条所说的"其他证据",符合补强证据的要求,共犯被告人供述相互印证的情形下能够定案,而且这也是各国的立法通例.     

关于转化型抢劫罪的适用条件

抢劫罪是侵犯财产犯罪中比较严重的犯罪,是刑法打击的重点。《刑法》第269条规定了一种比较特殊的转化型抢劫罪,即由盗窃、诈骗、抢夺行为转化为抢劫罪。文章对转化型抢劫罪成立的前提条件、客观条件和主观条件作了详细的论述,并且认为这三个条件同时具备才能成为转化型抢劫罪。     

Toward an Empirical Approach to Evidentiary Ruling

This paper responds to criticisms/misconstruals of our measure of the maximum probative value of evidence (D. Davis & W. C. Follette, 2002), and our conclusions regarding the potentially prejudicial role of intuitive profiling evidence, including motive. We argue that R. D. Friedman and R. C. Park's (2003) criticisms and example cases are largely based on inappropriate violation of the presumption of innocence. Further, we address the merits of our absolute difference measure of probative value versus those of the Bayesian likelihood ratio championed by D. H. Kaye and J. J. Koehler (2003). We recommend methods for presentation of measures of evidence utility that convey complexities of interdependence between new and existing evidence. Finally, we propose a probable cause standard for admission of potentially prejudicial evidence, dictating that admissibility of such evidence should be contingent upon other substantial evidence of guilt.     

我国警检关系完善新探

我国以"分工负责、互相配合、互相制约"为原则的警检关系在司法实践中暴露出一些问题。对此,学者们提出了见仁见智的解决方案。但问题的彻底解决必须在新的思路下进行,即设立看守警察职司侦查活动中的同步监督;设立证据规格,统一警检人员的认识。     

从“复印件主义”走向“起诉状一本主义”——对我国刑事公诉方式改革的一种思考

公诉方式包含着一系列复杂的诉讼法问题。我国现行的所谓"复印件主义"的公诉方式,存在着重大的法理缺陷和司法弊端,一定程度上阻碍了我国对抗制改革的进一步深化。改革的根本出路在于确立"起诉状一本主义"的公诉方式。     

关于"沉默权"问题的理性思考

许多案例表明,如果赋予犯罪嫌疑人以沉默权,将给侦查破案造成不利的影响,最早确立沉默权的英国从多年的司法实践中发现沉默权规定不利于查明案情,于1994年对沉默权制度作了重大修改.美国对实施了30多年的"米兰达规则"也提出了疑问,并通过判例规定了"米兰达规则"的若干例外.我国的"坦白从宽,抗拒从严"政策的精髓在于鼓励有罪的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人坦白认罪,允许其进行无罪或罪轻的辩解,但不承认犯罪嫌疑人、被告人有沉默权.赋予犯罪嫌疑人沉默权,其实际意义就是限制警察的讯问权.我们不主张沉默权,并不意味着警察在讯问犯罪嫌疑人时可以不受任何限制.虽然在某些案件中,口供是必不可少的重要证据,但我们必须坚持严禁刑讯逼供或以威胁引诱、欺骗等非法方式逼取口供.刑事诉讼证据较之民事诉讼中的证据要复杂得多,如果再赋予犯罪嫌疑人沉默权,则无异为侦查工作设置障碍,将造成案件久侦难破.     

An Evaluation of the Use of Videotaped Evidence for Juvenile Witnesses in Criminal Courts in England and Wales

For the first time, the UK Criminal Justice Act (1991) allowed the videotaped evidence of a child to be substituted for the child's evidence-in-chief in a criminal court. The present study is an evaluation of that legislation. One hundred and fifty children were observed testifying in a criminal court in the UK. The use of the videotaped evidence and subsequent cross-examination of the child witness (usually via the closed circuit television system) was also observed. The data base from the Lord Chancellor's Department of all trials involving child witnesses in England and Wales was also analysed. The results showed that the introduction of the video technology into the criminal courts reduced the levels of stress of child witnesses but did not increase the conviction rates.