Developing a scale to measure the presence of possible prejudicial stereotyping in police interviews with suspects: The Minhas Investigative Interviewing Prejudicial Stereotyping Scale (MIIPSS)

If police interviewers’ hold negative feelings towards certain groups, this may affect how they interview them (either as victims, witnesses or suspects) in that they may not obtain reliable accounts, being the aim of such interviews. The Minhas Investigative Interviewing Prejudicial Stereotyping Scale (MIIPSS) has been developed to assess the level of any investigative interviewers’ prejudicial stereotyping towards suspects. The current exploratory study involved semi-structured interviews with twenty people, who had previously been interviewed as suspects in England and also eight very experienced lawyers. Both their views were measured using the MIIPSS before being subjected to a Guttman analysis. Statistical analyses showed that MIIPSS satisfies the criteria for classification as a valid unidimensional and cumulative scale. Therefore, researchers could use MIIPSS as a tool to measure prejudicial stereotyping in investigative interviews. Interviewers could also use MIIPSS to monitor their own attitudes towards certain groups or individuals suspected of different types of crimes.     

试论公共厕所抢劫案件的侦防对策

近年来在公共厕所实施抢劫的案件时有发生。此类案件具有如下特点：作案地点精心选择,作案时间呈现较强的规律性,犯罪对象明确,犯罪主体集团化。应充分利用媒体的作用．及时发布发案信息,提醒公众注意防范;应加强侦查快速反应机制,及时串并案件,并加强证据意识;应加强公众自我防范意识教育,以掌握应对方法。     

To Test or Not To Test?: The Value of Toxicology in a Delayed Overdose Death

A case demonstrating the necessity of thorough death investigation processes where toxicology plays an active role is presented. A 33‐year‐old white man presented to the emergency room in respiratory distress after an overdose episode where he was revived on the scene by fire rescue. His condition continued to deteriorate and he expired 6 days after the initial incident. No admission specimens were available for testing; however, there were specimens drawn 4 and 5 days after the incident. Drug paraphernalia from the scene was obtained by the laboratory through collaboration with local law enforcement. Drug paraphernalia was initially tested in the laboratory and after obtaining the results, the antemortem and postmortem specimens were tested identifying mitragynine and U‐47700, among other drugs. These results indicate the value in obtaining and testing drug paraphernalia, and the value of testing antemortem specimens even in the event of a delay.     

论侦查权的概念

正确确立侦查权的概念是研究侦查权的基础。通过剖析侦查权的性质和特点 ,归纳出侦查权的属性 ,结合对现有侦查权概念的归类与评述 ,侦查权的概念应包括侦查权主体、权力运作的条件、实现侦查权的手段等内容 ,并据此将侦查权的概念界定为 :侦查权是国家侦查主体 ,为实现侦查目的 ,依法定的侦查程序 ,运用特定的侦查手段开展侦查活动的权力。     

论侦查学的研究对象

确定侦查学的研究对象有两个标准：一是特殊性标准,即侦查学的研究对象需具有区别于其它学科研究对象的特殊矛盾性;二是全面概括性标准,即侦查学的研究对象需能对侦查学的所有研究内容进行全面、抽象的概括。把侦查活动及其规律作为侦查学的研究对象符合该标准。     

全国人大调查权研究

调查权是立法机关固有的权力,由于议会调查权的行使能够有效地发挥监督政府的作用,因此,外国宪法和法律都对议会调查权作出规定。我国宪法和法律也赋予县级以上各级人民代表大会组织特定问题调查委员会的权力,同时,宪法还规定全国人民代表大会有监督权和重大事项决定权,这些权力的行使说明全国人大的调查权具有宪法依据。由于我国宪法没有明确规定人大的调查权,人大行使调查权的组织和程序也缺乏相应的法律规定,不利于全国人大充分行使这一权力,针对人大调查权难以启动的原因应采取相应的立法措施。     

对侦查讯问合法性、公正性的思考

侦查讯问的合法性,是指侦查讯问活动按照刑事诉讼法对侦查讯问的主体、讯问的方式、讯问的地点、讯问的顺序、讯问时应当保障的犯罪嫌疑人的权利的要求来开展;侦查讯问的公正性,是指侦查讯问的实体内容和讯问程序过程要体现公平、公道、合理、正义等价值目标。但我国现阶段的侦查讯问仍存在着不公正性的问题,要克服这种不公正性,可以确立有限沉默权的原则,完善立法,提高执法理念。