On The Explanations For The Situation In Criminal Cases

Evidence is the center of the whole proceeding, and there is a kind of evidence material that its legal position is unclear, however, adopted by the judicial organs in practice in the criminal proceedings.It is called explanations for the situation in the criminal cases.The material facts is issued by the investigators engaged in the work of the relevant investigation to point the process of criminal proceedings, the witness of the case facts, circumstances or program of handling the case. Its legal nature is not clear, however,without sufficient courtroom cross-examination,the judicial organs use it widely,which is a big threat to procedural rights of the accused and the case entity justice.Therefore, the author tries to through the way of field investigation and research to the court to record and study the kind and content of the case and the each type of evidence exist in the practice and application in detail.Through analyzing such widespread application material in the criminal proceedings,the author tries to find the legal character of this written materials and give it a clear legal position and put its application into the orbit in the rule of law.Through tribunals random sampling form the criminal cases accepted 2014 by a grass-roots court,the author record the kind and content of the existing in practice in detail. The fact proved in general can be divided into substantive law and procedural law fact, substantive law is the fact that affect the defendant conviction sentencing plot, including investigators witnessed in the process of handling the criminal suspects to commit crime and some of the circumstances of sentencing plot surrendered, merits, including the defendant confession, reconciliation and compensation, refund after gifts, range, violence, resisting arrest, etc.; And procedural law fact is explanation and illustration by investigators about the procedure of collecting evidence. The author will divide them into procedure cohabitancy classes and class evidence cohabitancy. Program cohabitancy class simply clarify procedures for the handling, does not involve physical problems and collected evidence.The author subdivide shi Ming class into three classes, notification explanation and record.Evidence cohabitancy class is illustration and explanation by investigators for the suspects and defects of the collected evidence to eliminate the evidence.This material have not been brought into the legal evidence species in our current criminal procedure law, but some of the judicial interpretation has acquiesced it evidence ability in several situation,such as “Exclusion of Illegal Evidence Rules in the Criminal Cases”(hereinafter referred to as "the Illegal Evidence Exclusion Rules")regulate how to make the materials issued by the investigators to prove the defendant confession made before the court procedure is legal, this affirmed its evidence attribute, similar to such provisions allow some of these materials to appear in court and prove that the relevant facts and procedures.However there are far more than these applied in practice, various case outside the law freedom exists in the course of legal proceedings, not control by law, which break the dignity and seriousness of law and has a harmful effect on cases of entity justice and procedure justice.I think it should be adopted into the legal evidence species except the program cohabitancy class, because program cohabitancy class is just a bulletin, interpretation or record for the case of progress and not involved in the case of solid content or existing evidence collecting process. The investigators witness testimony, sentencing evidence, evidence of shi Ming class shall be included in the species, because it proved the detail of criminal facts or authenticity, legitimacy of the relevant evidence.Proving relevant facts needs investigators, however, investigators can’t testify in court in every case, so we need alternative written materials to show the fact. It must be unified specification, carried on the strict censorship, and deny its advantage in the practical application ability. Besides,we should establish the finally applicable principle, if there is other evidence sufficient to form a complete chain or make up the evidence flaws, it should be banned to instead the related evidence.In case of needing it to make up for a lack of evidence chain,we must fully guarantee the right of cross-examination of the parties and establish mechanism of the presence of dissent investigators if there were different views among the prosecuting and defending parties in a long-term mechanism.Only in this way can it play its positive role, foster strengths and circumvent weaknesses.