俄罗斯联邦刑事诉讼中犯罪人有罪证明中的相关问题

《俄罗斯联邦刑事诉讼法典》第15条明确了辩论制原则,但其存在一定的负面效果。该法第86条的证据收集规则使有悖于指控倾向的事实材料、非国家机关性质诉讼参与人取得的鉴定结论及专家结论一律无法归入案卷。这打破了审前诉讼阶段的控辩平等,违背了刑诉法,最终导致了案件客观真相难以查明的后果。     

单位证明的误区——论刑事诉讼中的单位作证中如何避免滥用证人权利

单位作证是司法实践中的一种普遍现象,其中尤以单位证明的使用最为广泛和富有争议。本文阐述单位证明作为诉讼证据使用的现状,并对单位证明作合法性分析,解读因单位证明的使用导致单位滥用证人权利现象的产生及成因,提出如何规范和引导单位作证行为,限制和约束单位滥用证人权利,以解决单位作证中遇到的理论和实际问题。     

关于证据科学的思考

本文探讨了证据科学的要素。本文认为,证据科学必须是多学科的,或者整合性的。如果我们分享彼此基于证据的推理方面的思想和经验,我们都会受益于稳固确立的证据科学。     

从一起网站被入侵案件谈电子证据的获取

电子证据具有不同于其他证据的特征。掌握电子证据的独特性质,有助于在公共信息网络安全监察工作中解决和排除涉及电子证据的收集、审查、质证、采信等方面的困难和障碍。     

Impacts of increasing volume of digital forensic data: A survey and future research challenges

A major challenge to digital forensic analysis is the ongoing growth in the volume of data seized and presented for analysis. This is a result of the continuing development of storage technology, including increased storage capacity in consumer devices and cloud storage services, and an increase in the number of devices seized per case. Consequently, this has led to increasing backlogs of evidence awaiting analysis, often many months to years, affecting even the largest digital forensic laboratories. Over the preceding years, there has been a variety of research undertaken in relation to the volume challenge. Solutions posed range from data mining, data reduction, increased processing power, distributed processing, artificial intelligence, and other innovative methods. This paper surveys the published research and the proposed solutions. It is concluded that there remains a need for further research with a focus on real world applicability of a method or methods to address the digital forensic data volume challenge.     

The Direct and Cross-Examination of Complainants and Defendants in Rape Trials: A Quantitative Analysis of Question Type

This paper is a post-hoc examination of the questioning used in six rape trials. Questions asked in the evidence-in-chief and cross-examination of six complainants and five defendants were coded into different categories. The categories comprised "open", "closed", "leading", "heavily-leading" and "yes/no" questions; questions that are known to increasingly constrain witness responses. Additionally, the frequency of "multiple questions", and questions with "negatives" and "double negatives" were recorded; questions that witnesses have difficulty understanding. Broadly speaking, results showed that questions in both evidence-in-chief and cross-examination were of a constraining nature and allowed witnesses little opportunity to provide complete accounts of alleged events, particularly during cross-examination. Multiple questions were frequent although negatives were comparatively rare, and double negatives did not occur. Similar forms of questioning were used for complainants as for defendants, although more questions were asked of complainants than defendants in cross-examination. The results are discussed in terms of the adverse influence of these questioning strategies on the completeness and accuracy of witnesses' responses, and the similarity in "combativeness" of lawyers in their examination of complainants and defendants.     

单位证明的误区——论刑事诉讼中的单位作证中如何避免滥用证人权利

单位作证是司法实践中的一种普遍现象,其中尤以单位证明的使用最为广泛和富有争议。本文阐述单位证明作为诉讼证据使用的现状,并对单位证明作合法性分析,解读因单位证明的使用导致单位滥用证人权利现象的产生及成因,提出如何规范和引导单位作证行为,限制和约束单位滥用证人权利,以解决单位作证中遇到的理论和实际问题。     

遏制非法收集证据的良策--试述非法证据排除规则

非法收集证据在我国刑事司法过程中尚未绝迹,法律规定上的缺陷使得非法收集的证据在法庭上得以使用和确认。因此,必须确立诉讼程序中非法证据排除规则。     

刑事科学技术综合训练考核初探

事科学技术综合训练是将模拟犯罪现场勘验及物证检验结合起来的综合训练．是融合情景教学、案例教学、实践教学于一身的综合教学方法．是符合培养具有实战能力刑事科学技术人才的一种现代教学模式。本文结合我院刑事科学技术系在刑事科学技术综合训练中的实践。从考核评定依据、过程及其优化等方面探讨该综合训练的考核机制。以求制定一套更加完善的考核方案,使考核更加客观、公正。达到真实的反应学生的实际能力,检验教学效果的目的。     

非法证据排除规则在公安执法中被虚置的成因及对策

非法证据的排除是目前我国理论界和司法实践中普遍关注的热点,尤其是2010年7月1日,最高人民法院、最高人民检察院、公安部、国家安全部、司法部制定的《关于办理刑事案件排除非法证据若干问题的规定》正式施行,标志着我国的非法证据排除规则进入实质性运作阶段。而公安机关是刑事执法的证据收集者,研究非法证据排除规则在公安执法中的适用问题,对推动非法证据排除规则的贯彻实施与在立法上的进一步完善,遏制公安机关的刑事非法取证行为具有十分深远的现实意义。