The Research On Synchronous Audio And Video Recording In Duty Crime Interrogation

Investigation and interrogation recording system was origin from England for thepurpose of limiting police power abuse and for the purpose of protecting right of suspectedcriminal. This system is now used widely in procedure of interrogation. On March,1st,2012,this system was introduced to the investigation and interrogation phase of duty crime by ourprosecuting authority;“Three steps” was applied to all prosecuting authorities of our countriesin full operation on Oct.1st,2007. The article below would focus on summarizing andreflecting our current status of synchronous recording system on interrogation of duty crimesuspects and also would elaborate construction and improvement of synchronous recordingsystem based our national conditions, from the perspective of interrogation of duty crimesuspect of our prosecuting authorities; from the perspective of prosecution practice; with theway of comparing our practice of interrogation recording system and empirical research withpractice in Taiwan, HongKong and other countries. The whole article comprises of fourchapters with about26000words in total.Chapter1elaborates the nature, characteristics and significance of synchronous recording:This Chapter majorly demonstrates the nature of synchronous recording, justify it as essenceof evidence and investigation system, corrects the false propaganda and false idea thatsynchronous recording system is the only working material provided by prosecuting authoritywith the purpose of releasing the pressure on prosecuting authority from other multi relevantauthorities.Chapter2discusses and analyses Extraterritorial legislation on synchronous recordingsystem. The United Kingdom is the most canonical country as the origin of place startingsynchronous recording. Through development of several decades, police officers haveexperienced the process from resistance at the beginning to support. This fact indicates theright direction and vitality of synchronous recoding system. The not-one-size-fits-all practiceof synchronous recording system in Taiwan area where has same culture as us, is also a goodreference for our practice.Chapter3analyses current situation and problem of the synchronous recording system ofour country. This chapter points out from implementation perspective that tech investment isonly one part of the whole litigation system. The major problems of current system practiceexist in: narrow scope of implementation, unclear definition of legal attributes, un-practicable policy, un-neutral position of recording parties, difficulties of splitting investigating partiesfrom recording parties, difficulties of realizing synchronicity in the whole process ofrecording, un-standardized act of investigators in recording process, difficulties in practice ofgetting spot signature of criminal suspect, difficulties in ensuring funds, etc. All thoseproblems hinder the role of synchronous recording system where it should have.Chapter4elaborates the construction and improvement of synchronous recording system.The upcoming criminal law has included synchronous recording system into chapter ofinvestigating criminal suspect as term121, upgrading synchronous recording system tonational legislation level. In spite of with a legal ground, problems in practice would still exist,which would require a detailed enforcement regulations to expand scope of implementation,to construct a neutral parties of recording and inspection, to improve system of evidence ofdemonstration and of adoption in court, to improve the relevant guarantee system.