Research The Flawed Evidence And Its Conversion

A flawed evidence is evidence that involves minor illegality in its collection.This concept is brought up to mitigate the harshness of the rule of exclusion ofillegally obtained evidence. The most notable feature of flawed evidence is theexistence of flaw in its collection. This flaw, on one hand, renders the evidenceshort of full compliance with the law, but on the other hand, is not so substantialthat it significantly violates the procedure or other pertinent law. Therefore, itdistinguishes itself from both the legally and illegally obtained evidence.Furthermore, unlike the illegally obtained evidence that must be excluded, theadmissibility of flawed evidence is pending until conversion.Rules of flawed evidence are concentrated in the Rules Concerning Questionsabout Examing and Judging Evidence in Death Penalty Cases (hereinafter, the“Rules”). Handling other criminal cases could consult these rules. Generally,flawed evidence fall into two categories: flawed tangible evidence and flawedverbal evidence. flawed verbal evidence include flawed interrogation record,witness testimony, and identification record; flawed tangible evidence includeflawed physical evidence, documentary evidence, and records of on-siteinvestigation and inspection.The conversion of flawed evidence is to remove the flaw. In the Rules, thereare two ways to converse, one is rectification, the other is reasonableexplanation. However, in the author’s point of view, the defendant’s consentcould also been used to remove the flaw. A rectification is the affirmativecorrection of a prior act by a subsequent act. There are two forms of rectification:Supplement and corroboration. A reasonable explanation is the negativeadmission of the exitance of the flaw but “cures” the flawness by reasonableexplanation as to why the flaw is there. To say that the rectification is affirmative is because it directs directly to the flaw itself, clarifies the flaw andeventually eliminates it. To say that reasonable explanation is negative isbecause it focuses on the reasonableness as to the cause of flaw without regardto the flaw itself. The defendant’s consent is the agreement by whom theevidence is against to allow the flawed evidence be used at trial. This authorexamines the way of flaw conversion as to each evidentiary element: the subject,the time, the location, the content and the process and finally summarizes all theconversion patterns within the Rules.