Association Rule Research Evidence

Relevance rule of evidence is the basement of the system of evidence rule, it is called "gold rule" in Britain. Relevance is the premise of evidence admissibility in evidence rules of Anglo-American law system. There are a lot of admissibility rules designed around relevance of evidence. By contrast, it is difficult to find a clear definition in civil law countries’legislation including our country. Most evaluation of relevant evidence was left to judges’discretion in juridical practice. However, under the principle of modern free proof and evidentiary adjudication, the judgment of evidence relevance must be followed appropriate rules in addition to abide by conscience and rationality. The essence of evidence relevance is to exert certain legal limitation for judges’free proof which to avoid the abuse of discretion.Based on the predecessors’study, this dissertation made a systematic thought and superficial analysis on rules of evidence relevance in the countries of Anglo-American law system. The author tries to advance several concrete ideas to improve rules of evidence relevance on the legislative drawbacks of rules of evidence relevance in China. The dissertation consists of six parts, introduction, summarize of relevance rule of evidence, essential theory of relevance rule of evidence, admissibility rule of evidence, exclusionary rule of the relevance rule of evidence, relevance rule of scientific evidence.In introduction part, beginning with the legislative insufficiency and realistic awkward of relevance rule of evidence in China, the author introduces realistic meaning to improve China’s relevance rule of evidence, makes a review of current status of research on relevance rule of evidence at both home and abroad, and gives summary account of research thoughts and methods.Chapter I deals with the summarize of relevance rule of evidence. Firstly the author contrasts the concept of relevance rule of evidence and its research background of domestic and foreign scholars, points out that China’s scholars take relevance as one of the essential attribute or character to study and emphasize its demand of probative value, such research has no use to exclude evidence previously. In author’s view, we should first identify some peripheral concepts of relevance:the essential attribute of evidence is the competency of evidence (legal attribute) and the probative value (natural attribute), while all conventional "three attributes"(relevance, objectivity and validity) belong to prerequisite element of competency of evidence before certain evidence is entered into trial, which determined to be a admissible judicial evidence or not. Whether admissible evidence will be accepted by the court eventually depend its more or less relevance. So, to this extent, the essence of competency of evidence is that the relevance has or not, the essence of probative value of evidence is that the relevance is higher or lower. The relevance rule includes both rule of competency and probative value. Secondly, the author analyses the concept of relevance rule of evidence. In a broad sense, the author think the relevance rule of evidence refers to a series of collective name of rules to set the relevance has or not, higher or lower; but, in a narrow sense, the relevance rule of evidence refers to a collective name of general rule of probative value. General rule of probative value refers to the rules of probative value which excludes the rules of special rule of probative value such as presumption, standard of proof and judicial notice, it includes the best evidence doctrine, the rule of the corroborative evidence and the verified rule of indirect evidence; exclusionary rule of relevance refers to the exclusionary rules for it has minor relevance, which is different from other exclusionary rule of competency for it is obvious false.Chapter II deals with the essential theory of relevance rule of evidence. Based on the analysis of value orientation of relevance rule at Anglo-American evidence law, in author’s view, relevance rule embodies the values to improve judicial efficiency, to carry out social public policy, to resolve dispute as quickly as possible, apart from achieving substantial justice on the basis of paying attention to find truth. The author also thinks that the criterion to judge the relevance includes three connotations: materiality, provability and competence, the key is the limit qualitative rule of the probative value. According to the current status of Anglo-American evidence law, combining with the author’s analysis, the author classify the relevance rules as admissibility rules and exclusionary rules. The admissibility rule is set positively while the exclusionary rule is inclined to exclude relevance of certain evidence.Chapter III deals with the admissibility rule of evidence. The author introduces and analyzes the system of admissibility rule and legislation contents by adopting the method of comparative law. The author gives a general review to the legislative characteristics of the best evidence doctrine, and the admissibility of American’s habit evidence. The author advances the necessity to introduce admissibility rule of habit evidence, analyzes the method to further definite concrete rule of the corroborative rule of the single evidence, compares the concept of indirect evidence, and suggests that we should add several exceptions except for the principle of verification proof.Chapter IV deals with the exclusionary rule of the relevance rule of evidence. Based on the explication of a series of principles and exceptions of exclusionary rule of character evidence with characteristic at Anglo-American evidence law, the author thinks that it embodied the universality value of the balance between accusation and defense, fairness and efficiency. As for the rule of probability evidence, the author thinks it should be banned generally to prove the facts of crime as main evidence but admit to set exceptions in criminal procedure. Moreover, the author analyzes the basic concept of other exclusionary rules of evidence just as the irrelevancy rule about subsequent remedial and relieving behavior, the irrelevancy rule about compromise and plea in litigation.Chapter V deals with the relevance rule of scientific evidence. The author thinks that scientific evidence should be divide into expert testimony (or expert opinion) and other scientific evidence. Relevance rule of expert testimony includes: the competency rule of evidence just as expert’s qualification, technicality and finality; the rule of probative value just as inspection rule of the scientific principles, the professional field and the process of argumentation. As for other scientific evidence, the author thinks we should establish exclusionary relevance rule of lie-detecting conclusion in principle except for the tested accepted voluntarily. As for electronic evidence, we should establish the best evidence doctrine and the rule of reliability presumption.As for legislative construction of relevance rule of evidence in China,The author thinks our present relevance rule of evidence has some drawbacks with rigid, simple, scattered, and without operability in practice. Considering the diversity of value orientation of relevance rule, firstly, the author advances that we should improve the system of the admissibility rule including the best evidence doctrine, the rule of habit evidence, the rule of the corroborative evidence and the verified rule of indirect evidence; secondly, learning the related legislation from America we should establish the system of exclusionary rules including exclusionary rule of character evidence of the criminal accused, exclusionary rule of probability evidence, irrelevancy rule about subsequent remedial and relieving behavior and irrelevancy rule about liability insurance; finally, we should establish and perfect the relevance rule of scientific evidence in our country.