Improved Area of Origin Estimation for Bloodstain Pattern Analysis Using 3D Scanning

An important component of crime scene reconstruction is bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA). Where BPA concerns impact patterns, estimating the area of origin is critical information for scene reconstruction. Traditionally, this is achieved by measuring individual bloodstains and performing trigonometric calculations; however, 3D scanning has been proposed as a viable alternative for overcoming logistical and practical concerns with the manual method. Therefore, this project aimed to establish whether the FARO Focus 3D scanner and FARO Zone 3D software can improve the accuracy of area of origin estimates relative to the manual method. We created a series of eight bloodstain impact patterns and performed paired analysis using the two methods to estimate areas of origin for each pattern. Our data suggested that FARO-derived estimates were generally more accurate than using the manual method. FARO-estimated heights of origin areas were generally closer to the true distance. Both methods underestimated the distance from the wall for most patterns originating 150mm or greater from the wall, but overestimated distances for patterns originating closer to the wall. The degree to which distances were underestimated increased significantly the further the blood source was from the wall and was greater for FARO-derived estimates. The results of this research contribute to the validation of these instruments for operational implementation for BPA and should be considered alongside the practical benefits of 3D scanning relative to manual methods. Further, 3D scanning can provide reliable BPA reconstruction documentation for technical review and court presentation.     

论不追究刑事责任

我国《刑法》和《刑事诉讼法》用三个不同的概念对不追究刑事责任作了规定。《刑事诉讼法》第16条所规定的不追究刑事责任可分为三种情形,但《刑法》第201条第4款中规定的不予追究刑事责任并未归属其中。现行刑事立法在不追究刑事责任的规定中概念不统一,《刑法》在规定不追究刑事责任方面不当缺位,已有的规定也较为粗糙,《刑事诉讼法》缺乏特赦令执行的程序规定,我们有必要完善不追究刑事责任的刑事立法规定。     

刑事被害人当事人化的反思与制度重构

刑事被害人当事人化的实质是犯罪损害追诉方式的公私合一,该制度设计混淆了公益和私益两种不同性质的诉讼,导致两种权益保护相互冲突进而对刑事司法结果公正造成负面影响。公私分离是刑事被害人去当事人化的当然制度选择,其立法对策主要包括在刑事立法中确立被害人为特殊诉讼参与人、废除被害人在刑事审判中就定罪量刑发表意见的权利、废止被害人刑事自诉权和切断其引起刑事二审、再审的程序路径。同时需要完善相关配套举措,如允许被害人对其物质和精神损害单独提起民事诉讼、完善精神损害赔偿制度、建立刑事被害人国家补偿制度等。     

Two-dimensional metric comparisons between dynamic bare footprints and insole foot impressions-forensic implications

Footwear may be found at crime scenes as physical evidence. Such footwear often has impression features of the wearer’s foot on the insole of the shoe. Scientific research and literature have established that footprints are distinct. This study compares two-dimensional measurements on bare footprints to foot impressions on insoles to determine if significant differences or similarities exist. Dynamic footprints were collected from 51 donors using the Identicator® Inkless Shoe Print Model LE 25P system. Seven foot length and width measurements were taken based on the Reel linear measurement method. Footprint measurements between bare footprints and foot impressions on the insoles were compared. Only two differences (p > 0.05) were observed between the various bare footprint and insole foot impression measurements on the right and left side for most of the measurements, CALC (p < 0.001) and A1 (p = 0.04). Bare footprint and insole A5 measurements on the left side were also significantly different (p = 0.015). The results of the study have implications in the forensic analysis of foot impression evidence on insoles in footwear in assisting with identifying the wearer of said footwear. Situations may arise in the forensic context when comparing the foot impression on the insole of footwear to a suspect’s bare footprint or a footprint from post-mortem remains. This study contributes to the scant literature available on the topic and to understanding the similarities and differences observed in the various linear measurements that may be utilized in the comparison process of footprint impressions on shoe insoles to bare footprints.     

法医精神病鉴定内容架构及评定要点解析

法医精神病鉴定在刑事、民事和行政三大诉讼领域中,以鉴定意见的证据形式发挥着重要作用。然而,与其重要性不相匹配的是,法医精神病鉴定学科发展尚不完善、专业发育尚不成熟,尚不能满足社会和民众的期盼和要求,甚至引发负面评价。为进一步促进法医精神病鉴定规范化、标准化建设。以法医精神病鉴定人的视角,结合法医精神病鉴定的内容架构,重点阐述法医精神病鉴定主要项目及其作用、评定要点,尤其聚焦刑事责任能力评定,阐明当前存在分歧和困难;简要介绍法医精神病鉴定人执业要求、法医精神病鉴定质量控制;以及简述法医精神病鉴定与临床精神医学实践的区别与联系。     

对犯罪动机概念的质疑——关于犯罪心理学基本理论问题的探讨

针对犯罪动机概念内涵不清、应用混乱的状况,文章对犯罪动机概念提出本质和界定方面的质疑。犯罪动机是犯罪行为发生、发展和完成的内部起因;预期的犯罪目的是犯罪动机的根本属性;犯罪动机不是犯罪行为的共同属性,而应该是犯罪心理学的通用概念;犯罪动机概念应修订为犯罪的动机,可划为犯因性动机、一般性动机、无意识动机和有意犯罪动机、模糊犯罪动机、无意犯罪动机两大类。     

英美刑法中的犯罪行为及其启示

英美刑法中犯罪行为的概念具有不同于大陆法系刑法中犯罪行为概念的特色。文章通过对英美刑法中犯罪行为概念的展开,分析了犯罪行为的地位及其与犯罪构成的关系,并且进行了分类介绍。人们应汲取英美刑法中犯罪行为理论的合理内核,将持有视为与作为和不作为并列的第三犯罪行为形式。     

关于搞好行政执法与刑事司法衔接的刍议

加强行政执法与刑事司法衔接的法律监督,是检察机关法律监督职责的重要方面,构建这方面的监督机制,是新时期保民生、保稳定、保发展,学习实践科学发展观的要求,也是法律监督发展的必然要求。为此,要加强监督、转变观念、摆正行政执法与刑事司法的关系,建立监督机制,形成执法监督合力。     

当今罪刑法定主义语境下刑事习惯法之命运:解构抑或建构

在当今罪刑法定主义强势话语权的背景下,刑事习惯法是被绝对排除适用的,不管是民族学界还是法学界都不得不对少数民族刑事习惯法之当然命运做出理论和实践上的正确回应。因此,只有以少数民族地区之刑事习惯法为视域,探索其在当地民族地区之实然解决纠纷之作用,引出法与法律、国家法与民间法、刑事制定法与刑事习惯法三大范畴,才能客观揭示刑事制定法与刑事习惯法之关系,进而揭示刑事习惯法之立法和司法命运。     

侦审合一后的预审工作研究

我国的预审制度起源于1931年12月中华苏维埃共和国临时中央政府颁布的训令,立法于1979年7月我国颁布的第一部《刑事诉讼法》中,它在公安机关办理刑事案件中发挥了重要作用。1997年6月公安部作出侦审合一的刑侦体制改革,但目前侦审合一呈现多元化的格局,它既有改革相配套的制度和措施跟不上的原因,又有侦查人员破案任务重和素质能力弱,无法适应改革要求的原因。未来的预审工作,除了允许侦审合一的多种形式存在外,应当继续推进侦审合一;提高现有侦查人员侦查、预审素质;实行受过专门训练的公安、政法院校侦查学专业或者相近专业毕业的学生准入侦查部门的制度。