鉴定人出庭与专家辅助人角色定位之实证研究

新刑事诉讼法试图改变鉴定人出庭率低的现状,为此完善了鉴定意见审查规则;相应地,新确立的专家辅助人制度也被寄予厚望。从理论上看,保障被告方的对质权应成为上述改革的主要支点。但实证研究显示,鉴定人出庭率并没有因为新刑事诉讼法的实施而显著改善,鉴定人与法官对于鉴定人出庭都缺乏积极性;专家辅助人在法庭上的角色定位是模糊的,其在鉴定人、证人、辩护律师和其他独立的诉讼参与人等角色之间徘徊。应当围绕保障被告方的对质权来完善必要鉴定人出庭制度,在保留职权化和强调中立性的鉴定制度的同时,赋予专家辅助人意见以证据能力,以构建控辩平等的司法鉴定体系。     

The over-citation of Daubert in forensic anthropology

The 1993 US Supreme Court decision Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. presented new guidance for the judicial assessment of expert witness evidence and testimony in the determination of admissibility. Despite the rarity of admissibility challenges to forensic anthropology evidence, Daubert is frequently cited in published forensic anthropology research. This study undertook a qualitative thematic analysis of forensic anthropology articles published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences to assess why authors continue to cite Daubert and express concerns over potential exclusion. The results show a significant increase in the number of articles that cite legal admissibility standards over time (p < 0.001). Authors frequently cite these standards to contextualize their results within the Daubert framework or to justify the need for their research. Notably, many articles present Daubert as a constraining force, misinterpreting the guidelines as rigid criteria or that they require methods to be strictly quantitative. However, Daubert was intended to be a flexible tool for judges—not a standard or instruction for scientists. While it was reasonable to reflect on the scientific rigor of methods in the wake of the Daubert decision, a new perspective is warranted in which forensic anthropologists shift their focus from trying to “satisfy” admissibility guidelines to adopting quality assurance measures that minimize error and ensure confidence in analytical results, and developing and using methods that are grounded in good science—which is important regardless of whether or not the results are ever the subject of a trial.     

知识产权刑事案件证据调查与认定——以新刑事诉讼法为视角

刑事诉讼法的本次大修是适应社会转型的需要,它在证据方面的修订对知识产权的刑事法保护有着重要影响,如增加了电子数据形式、增设行政证据向刑事证据的转换机制、增加了专家证人形式、规范了诱惑侦查措施等。不断完善的程序法必定会逐渐增强对知识产权的刑事法保护。     

论在医疗纠纷诉讼中推行专家辅助人制度

医学专家意见在医疗纠纷诉讼中占有重要地位,在不同法系国家分别以鉴定和专家证言的形式出现在法庭诉讼中。目前,我国已形成了以医疗事故技术鉴定和医疗过错鉴定为主体的医疗专业技术鉴定体制,但当前面临着诸多困境。从专家证据制度改革和医学专家意见形成特点等层面分析,专家辅助人制度与普通法系国家专家证人制度类似,其和鉴定制度的有机结合可以在医疗纠纷诉讼领域构建更为理想的专家证据制度;有助于最大限度地使法律真实靠近客观真实。但过于强大的医疗专业技术鉴定制度对专家辅助人制度具有明显的压制作用,因此需适当限制鉴定制度,大力推行专家辅助人制度,同时应总结相关国家经验教训,防止专家辅助人制度产生不应有的负面效应。     

Cases of Kava Impairment in Iowa Drivers

Kava is an Oceanic plant in which the root is consumed as a beverage and is becoming increasingly popular. The effects of kava consumption may include sedation, euphoria, and impairment of motor coordination. This article demonstrates kava impairment through four cases of self‐reported kava use supported with Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) evaluations of each subject. Subject's urines screened negative for common drugs of abuse by immunoassay analysis. Urine from cases 3 and 4 were analyzed by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry, and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry, which yielded the presence of kavalactones. Subjects exhibited poor driving behavior and signs of intoxication. Indicators of impairment from multiple drug categories, central nervous system (CNS) depressants, CNS stimulants, and cannabis were observed, which may be consistent with the presence of multiple kavalactones and their diverse array of mechanisms of action. The consumption of kava can hinder one's ability to operate a vehicle safely.     

犯罪心理测试结论及其证据属性

证据具有客观性、关联性、合法性等特征,鉴定结论属于证据的一种。理论和实践都证明犯罪心理测试结论也具有证据的客观性、关联性、合法性等特征,因此,犯罪心理测试结论的属性是证据,且属于《刑事诉讼法》规定的七种证据形式之一的鉴定结论。当前我国犯罪心理测试制度存在不科学、不完善等问题,应从测试主体、测试程序、测试环境条件、测试方法和测试结论的审查等方面规范测试制度。     

法律判断形成的模式

法律判断是应用法律的结果。法律应用包括法律适用和法律发现 ,且主要是法律发现。在法律适用中 ,事实与规范相适应 ,判断可直接通过推论得出 ,这可称为推论模式 ;而在法律发现中 ,由于事实与规范不对称 ,在通过推论得出判断之前 ,先要对事实与规范进行等置 ,使事实一般化 ,将个案向规范提升 ,将规范具体化 ,使规范向个案下延 ,并在两者之间来回审视 ,螺旋式向上发展 ,这就是等置模式。相应地 ,法律判断形成模式包括推论模式和等置模式两种。     

风险规制与专家理性——评布雷耶的《粉碎邪恶循环:面向有效率的风险规制》

布雷耶在《粉碎邪恶循环:面向有效率的风险规制》一书中分析了美国政府在规制那些不起眼的风险过程中所呈现的风险规制议程确定的随意性、规制缺乏连续性等情形。他认为产生这些问题的症结可以归因于一个邪恶循环,即公众对风险的认知、国会的反应以及规制过程的不确定。为打破这一邪恶循环,则需要建立一种以目标为导向的,去政治化的、精英式的"超级专家理性"制度。就我国风险规制而言,由于存在着与美国政府相似的问题,而布雷耶法官所提出的"超级专家理性"制度切中了我国风险规制体系的要害,因此,这项制度对于破解我国风险规制所存在的问题具有重要的启示意义。     

谈学术期刊的编辑素质建设

文章针对国内外学术期刊编辑素质的差异,分析了中国学术期刊与国际接轨,应从提高期刊编辑的素质入手,增强编辑的现代办刊能力和市场经济意识,培养出高素质的期刊编辑队伍.     

专家辅助人的比较考察与制度重塑——以科技类证据在诉讼中的运用为视角

本文重点不在于从学理上对专家辅助人做细致的分析研究,而旨在尝试解决涉及科学技术类纠纷案件中专家辅助人的几个难题.比如专家辅助人的定位、利益冲突的处理、专家意见的边界等.这些问题决定了专家辅助人的核心权利义务,包含着影响专家辅助人客观公正地发挥职能的核心要素.对这些问题,法律规定不清,学者争议较大,但审判中又必须面对.解...