New Theory About Criminal Presumption

Presumption which act as a special fact-finding way has caused the extensive concern in thelitigation legal theory and practice area, but for the meaning of "presumption" is still controversial；about the effect of presumption,there is still no determined opinion; besides, the relationship betweenpresumption and the presumption of innocence is ambiguous; what’s more, there is few people thinkabout the litigation value that presumption pursue, all this has led to all the chaos on presumption issues.The purpose of this paper is to discover the real meaning of presumption, the practical effect ofpresumption, as well as the relationship between presumption and the presumption of innocence and toresearch and discuss the value goal of presumption and criminal proceedings. All the above is meant toarrive at the core of this paper, namely: presumption can not apple to criminal proceedings. This papersupposes that the real presumption must be from a non-elements of fact destruct an element of fact, inthe case of non-rebuttal, identified the establishment of the presumption of fact, according to the law.The effect of presumption applies would cause the conversion of the burden of proof on conditions,rather than simply caused the transfer or inversion of the burden of proof, which makes the presumptionand the presumption of innocence have irreconcilable contradictions. In addition, the value goal ofpresumption is legal truth, but the value goal of criminal procedure is objective truth, the differencebetween presumption and criminal procedure on value goal also highlights the lack of coordination ofpresumption and criminal proceedings. In short, the presumption of its own characteristics, and theeffect it causes, coupled with the contradictions between it and the presumption of innocence, plus thedifferent value targets between it and criminal procedure, resulting presumption does not apply incriminal proceedings.