Font Size: a A A

On The Scientific Evidence In Judicial Finding Of Fact

Posted on:2012-04-01Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:J ZhaoFull Text:PDF
GTID:2166330332497257Subject:Legal theory
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
The rapid development of science and technology make more and more influence on judicial finding of fact. A lot of scientific evidence in the court makes the both sides parties and the judge difficult to grasp it. Facing history of the scientific evidence, we can see it showing a multi-disciplinary, theoretical and professional tendency; these trends make scientific evidence though judicial finding of fact out of the control of the court.This paper argues that the pursuit of objective truth is the reason for the introduction of scientific evidence, professional social division of labor makes this trend inevitable. Analyzing the judicial practice around the world, to address the contradiction between lack of knowledge on the issue and increasing degree of specialization, the court introduce scientific knowledge in the form of scientific evidence. Although different countries structure different methods and system settings, but they are the same in general. However, due to the fact that the parties and the judge are lack of appropriate scientific knowledge, scientific evidence in court is so hard to get a fair evaluation. The function of scientific evidence that supporting finding the fact is difficult to achieve, and result theoretical paradox, which is contrary to the concept of judicial independence. In the judicial practice, there are two different phenomenons, one is to see scientific evidence as the truth and blind worship, the other is to see it as scientific research activities and debate endless in court. Therefore, the legitimacy and effectiveness of scientific evidence is questioned.Countries have also emerged a number of issues in the judicial practice, such as the rules of expert testimony has several times changing in the United States, and has not reached a unified conclusion yet. Scanning Chinese judicial practice, expert conclusions have become the outstanding issues of justice. The question whether scientific evidence will make up for the deficiencies in the knowledge and capacity of the parties and the judge, needs urgent investigation.Facing the theoretical and practical issues above, this paper reveal that scientific evidence is in the nature of the comments based on scientific knowledge of the experts, which has a certain degree of subjectivity. This is the legitimacy for scientific evidence to be regulated. Scientific evidence is the main form of science and technology in the judicial finding of fact, so to regulate it requires attention not only on the competency of evidence but also the probative force of evidence.Competency of evidence is a qualitative category, to govern it of scientific evidence; we can learn from rule of expert testimony in America and U.K., structure expert consulting system and distribute the costs of identification. Probative force is a metrizable category, which is fixed though the certification process. To govern it of scientific evidence, we should improve the whole procedures to meet the scientific evidence. Only in this way can the scientific evidence be treated correctly.
Keywords/Search Tags:scientific evidence, finding of fact, forensic science
PDF Full Text Request
Related items