On Application Of Confession Rules In The Criminal Trial

The oarl conefssion have an important position in the rules for evidences, and important to ensure the correct use of confessions. The statemen is divided into four parts. The first part define the information and testimony to the basic concept and functions of oarl conefssion and its rules. The concept of the oarl conefssion, said that the special statement refers to the criminal suspect or defendant statement. The rules system should be constructed on the rules of evidence collection, examination, exlusion and corroboration. The second part analyse the evidence value of confession in criminal cases. Confessions get ability of evidence are conditional. Arbitrary statute should an guarantee to that ability. To ensure that that statement, the author thinks that confessions as evidence in words and evidence had strongly subjective than that of subjectivity.This characteristics make limitations to the functions of the confession. Thus, confessions by the force should be made to reinforcing stature. In judicial practice, we can not relying too heavily on confessions or ignore the evidence of the confession. The third part make the focus on the legislation and problems in criminal litigation practice of the confession rules. Although china's law of criminal procedure established rules of the relevant confession, but too simple. Confessions rules itself without specific standards and implementation procedures, so the existing confession rules are not been fully implemented in the judicial practice. The fourth part put forwrard some legislative suggestions for each of confession system that there are lots of problems. Through established the rights of knowing the rules, help from the lawyer, and to establish an independent investigation mechanism, improve the examination system and improve the arbitrary rules to improve the rules of evidence collection. Through the clear up conditions of corroboration evidence, limited the scope of the corroboration evidence and unified the corroboration evidence to improve corroboration rules. Through clear challenge the validity of the subject of debate is charged with the parties, including judges, established principles, established by direct words about the rules, reform the procedure and avoid formalism to improve examination rules. further clarify rules should be to eliminate illegal statements and illegal statement of equilibrium of the responsibility to improve the exclusion rules.