| 直接证据与间接证据划分标准:比较、反思与重构 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 奚玮,余茂玉.直接证据与间接证据划分标准:比较、反思与重构[J].河北公安警察职业学院学报,2007,7(1):14-17. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 奚玮 余茂玉 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 安徽师范大学,安徽,芜湖,241000;中国政法大学,北京,100088 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 我国学者关于"能否直接证明案件主要事实"的直接证据与间接证据划分标准有悖于逻辑学一般规则,也无法满足理论与实践的需求,而域外学者就直接证据与间接证据的划分标准则较为科学合理.直接证据和间接证据的划分标准应界定为:能否直接证明诉讼中依照法律规定需要证明的事实.
|
| 关 键 词： | 直接证据 间接证据 划分标准 |
| 文章编号： | 1672-6405(2007)01-0014-04 |
| 修稿时间： | 2006年1月26日 |
On Criterion of Dividing Direct Evidence and Indirect Evidence |
| |
| Xi Wei,Yu Maoyu.On Criterion of Dividing Direct Evidence and Indirect Evidence[J].Journal of Hebei Vocational College of Public Security Police,2007,7(1):14-17. |
| |
| Authors: | Xi Wei Yu Maoyu |
| |
| Abstract: | In our country, Scholars' criterion of dividing direct and indirect evidence is against the general rules of logic and can not meet the needs of theory and practice while the criterion of foreign scholars is more scientific and reasonable. The criterion of dividing the two kinds of evidence should be whether they can directly prove the facts that, according to the law, need to be proved in a lawsuit. |
| |
| Keywords: | direct evidence indirect evidence criterion of dividing |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
|
