Application Of The Proof Mode Under Mutual Corroboration In "One On One" Rape Cases

The admissibility of the victim’s verbal evidence in the “one on one” rape cases, hasbeen a difficulty in juridical practice, in order to solve this problem, law experts also make alot of discussions in our country. The reason why these cases are difficult to confirm is that:One side, the particularity of these "one on one" rape cases determines the difficulty of thecognizance of such cases. First, evidence is insufficient, and most of them are labile verbalevidence. Second, it will be more complicated in proving whether malefaction breacheswomen’ will than other “one on one” rape cases. On the other side, in practice, the judicialoffice follows a kind of proof mode under mutual corroboration, since mutual corroborationhas been emphasized badly,“one on one” cases become a problem of litigation proof. Manydeficiencies has been exposed under the proof model of high standards in the application ofthe "one on one" rape cases. Therefore, we need to think seriously about such problems.This paper includes three pars: introduction, text and epilogue, there are about21000words.The first part: first, the author makes a preliminary explanation about "one on one" rapecases. Second, combining with the interview from four prosecutors of public prosecutiondepartment and four judges of criminal tribunals, the author combs the specific cognizanceway in practice.The second part aims at analyzing how proof mode under mutual corroboration to applyin "one on one" rape cases. First, the author illustrates the characteristics, essence, and theirown advantages of proof mode, and makes a distinction between it and free evaluation ofevidence. Second, the author briefly illustrates how such cases are recognized by judicialpersonnel in practice.The third part focuses on analyzing the existing problems from proof mode under mutualcorroboration to apply in "one on one" rape cases. First of all, since objective confirmationand the quantity of evidence has been emphasized badly, and not pay attention to the innerlink between evidence, which easily led to high standard, thus a number of “one on one” rapecases can’t be confirmed for mutual corroboration is not enough. Second, in view of theparticularity of such cases, judicial personnel must apply experience rules, even underinteractive mode in our country, the judge must analyze the truth of each evidence, meanwhile,the experience rule will be applied definitely, but there are danger in practice. The third, since direct evidence is mutual contradiction and lack of indirect evidence, in order to find out facts,the judges certainly hope more evidence. But the principle of direct and verbal trial can’t becarried out, the witness and the victim seldom appear in court. Thus a large number of hearsayevidence appear in court, not only cause harm to right of confrontation, but also is bad for thediscovery of the truth. Finally, under the implementation of criminal procedure law, theprinciple of human rights protection and the privilege against self-incrimination is established,a series of measures that protect human rights against extorting confessions by torture isenforced, this brings about enormous challenges for proof mode under mutual corroboration.Part Four, the author gives the proof mode of “one on one”rape case further thinking. Onthe basis of the above part, the author puts forward the idea: restructure free evaluation ofevidence, implement this free proof mode fully and learn rational factors, turn the mode undermutual corroboration into just a method. Meanwhile, the author attempts to put forward someimprovements and suggestions, including advancing judge’s qualification, publicity of freeevaluation; further promoting judicial independence; regulating experience rules’ utilization;insisting on the principle of direct and verbal trial, strengthening the witness and the victim totestify in court, etc, thus tender better circumstance and conditions for free evaluation ofevidence.