Role Conflict And Role Correction Of Police Experts Under Role Theory

As an important part of China's judicial expertise system,the internal forensic institutions of public security organs play an important role in criminal proceedings.Under this system,the police experts play two important roles at the same time in criminal proceedings,namely,the role of investigator and the role of expert.However,according to the role conflict theory of social psychology,an individual playing two conflicting social roles will definitely cause role conflict and lead to role-playing failure.As the direct manifestation of the role conflict of the police experts,the error of the expert conclusion will surely lead to the error of the fact-finding,and then affect the realization of judicial justice.Therefore,by using the research results of social psychology and the logical analysis framework of role conflict theory,this paper makes a profound analysis of police experts.This paper analyzes the institutional causes of the role conflict of police experts and puts forward three ways to correct the role conflict of police experts by referring to the institutional arrangements of the main legal system countries in the world.This paper is divided into four parts:The first part briefly introduces the development history and research content of role theory.As the theoretical analysis basis of this paper,roles are defined as a series of specific behavior patterns in line with social expectations.To be specific,this behavior pattern is manifested by individuals in a certain social status,according to the objective expectations of the society,with the help of their subjective ability to adapt to the social environment.The second part uses the role theory to analyze the police experts from the three perspectives of role expectation,role status,and role behavior pattern and concludes that the police experts have role conflict.On this basis,this paper deeply analyzes the institutional causes of the role conflict of police experts--as the prosecution role,the public security organ has set up a neutral forensic institution.In addition,this part also analyzes the adverse impact of the role conflict of police experts and believes that the existence of police experts not only affects the credibility of the expert conclusion,hinders the realization of judicial justice,but also hinders the healthy development of the forensic industry in some extent.The third part systematically studies the setting of the forensic institutions of representative countries in the world's mainstream legal system.This part corrects the erroneous view of some investigators that there is nothing wrong with the current judicial expertise system in China because of the establishment of forensic institutions by foreign investigation agencies.This part points out that foreign forensic institutions are only set up in the investigation agencies,but the appointment and removal of personnel,administrative subordination,and funding sources are independent of the investigation agencies.At the same time,this part provides institutional experience for the reform of the system that causes the conflict of the role of police experts and for the further design of the scientific judicial expert system in China.The fourth part refers to the management system of judicial expertise institutions in other countries and puts forward three ways of role correction based on the actual situation in China.From the perspective of internal role correction,the most thorough way of role correction is to separate the two opposing roles.Therefore,this part discusses the necessity,feasibility,and concrete reform methods of separating the police and expert identity of police experts.In addition,as an important external role correction,judicial control of the forensic expertise process and court cross-examination should be implemented as soon as possible,only in this way can we ensure the credibility of the expert conclusion and eliminate the negative effects caused by the conflict of the role of police experts.