Reaserch On Leading Question

Rule of leading question is an important criterion of trial witness investigation.By distinguishing their specific circumstances to permit and prohibit the use ofleading questions can play a positive role while suppressing the negative effects thatmay arise. Accordingly, many countries have established a relatively rules of leadingquestion. However, leading question is not getting enough attention in our criminalproceedings.In practice they can not get the correct and uniform treatment because ofimperfect and unreasonable rules. The current academic study of leading questionbasically stay in a simple introduction level, lack of attention to China’s judicialpractice, and rarely make meaningful recommendations. Therefore, the systemresearch on the specific content of the rule of leading question and the law ofproduction and operation of the rule of leading question may contribute to an accurateinterpretation of the phenomena of leading question in Criminal Practice and establishour rule of leading question reasonably..In addition to the introduction and conclusion of this article, the text is dividedinto four parts and total forty-six thousand words.The first part describes the main contents of the foreign rules of leading question.Legislation and case of the United States as the main line, leading question isgenerally defined as two types, namely, how to instruct the witness to answer or toanswer queries embedded in questioning the way. To avoid inquirer to guide witnesses,leading question is forbidden in drect-examination except for some preparation in theinvestigation matters, special circumstances or hostile witness appearing. Conversely,leading question is usually allowed in cross-examination.But it is forbidden whenquerying the witness who stands at the opposite position, or at other unsuitablesituation of using leading questions. For improper leading questions, the judge willreview and rule for the challenged by the opposition parties. In inquisitorial trial.,judge will stop directly. The second part analyzes the reasonable foundation of generation and operationof the rule of leading questions. From the institutional foundation, the adversarial trialsystem, party-led investigation of evidence, the jury trial system andcross-examination system promote the generation and development of rule of leadingquestion. So common law countries have generally more completed rules of leadingquestion than the mainland law countries. From the value of litigation, to allow andprohibit leading questions contribute to finding objective truth and preventingdistortion of the facts; Restrictions on the proof of the advantages of behavior to useleading question contributes to promoting equality of prosecution and realizingprocedural justice; To allow leading question at some key points in the trialcontributes to catching the focus to improve trial efficiency.The third part studys the leading question in our crimal procedure. From the legalnorms, the Supreme Court judicial interpretation which generally prohibits leadingquestion does not comply with the purpose of establishment. The Supreme People’sProcuratorate judicial interpretation which prohibits false, wrong-induced leadingquestion are too general and operational to lack of effectiveness. It can be said wehave never established rule of leading question as the standand. From investigativeinquiry, the leading question always appears, and often more likely to occur wheninterrogates after the first,some of them involve main facts. From trial proceedings,the trial, prosecution and the defense may use leading questions, generally the defenseis majority, some of which are improper leading; Both parties have merely raisedobjections on the leading of the other side. Different judges have different treatment.Overall, the prosecution and the defense asked for the recognition of the positive roleof induced higher than the judges, the majority in favor of the Perfection of the rule ofleading question.The fourth part discusses the construction of rule of leading question in ourcriminal procedure. Rule of leading question is necessary for fact-finding hearing,fully cross-examination of denfense and efficiency of the trial. Because of ourcontinuous improvement of adversarial trial, the gradual strengthening in real terms,and more supportive of judicial officers in the background, China already has the feasibility to establish rule of leading question.First, it should be premised on asystem of investigation procedures witnesses to transform cross-examination style, toform a " cross-examination based, inquisitorial query supplemented " investigativemode. Secondly,rule of leading question should be clearly prescribed by judicialinterpretation. Leading question should be clearly implied to two forms:the questionimplies answer or assumes the disputed facts. Generally,leading question is forbiddenin drect-examination,conversely permitted in cross-examination.According to the riskof a false statement,we can distinguish between the absolutely banned situation andthe relatively banned situation. Generally, the judge will stop relative banned leadingquestion by the objection based on the prosecution and defense.But he must stop theabsolutely banned leading questions initiatively no matter there is objection or not.Pretrial disputes about leading question shall be resolved by the witness testifying incourt. Finally, three complementary measures should be completed: the promotion oftestify on court, strengthen the training of trial counsel and improvement ofinquerying skill of prosecution and defense.Thus, rule of leading question will applywith greater space.