Predicament And Outlet Of Fact-finding In Criminal Subjective Facts

Fact-finding in criminal subjective facts is generally considered to be difficult.There is even a view that the subjective fact can not be proved unless the defendant is confessed,or the presumption is used.accurate fact-finding is the prerequisite for the correct application of law.The task of the criminal procedure is to find the truth and punish the crime,so the referee needs to face the difficulties directly.Therefore,it is of practical significance to find ways to overcome the difficulties.The existing research takes the presumption as the key and the main content.However,it is not enough to just pay attention to how to solve the difficulties.The question is that we will be more likely to ignore the specific process of fact-finding,which is related to how difficulties arise.We need to know that the difficulty is due to the particularity of the subjective fact itself,or the problem of the method of identification.It is necessary to find out the essence of the problem and to discuss the solution.Therefore,we need to first comb the specific process of fact-finding in criminal subjective facts.Then it is also necessary to observe the judicial practice in our country,and analyze the practical application of different methods.On this basis,we can analyze the essence and the specific content of the predicament,and then discuss how to use different methods to solve the problem.Besides the introduction,the article is divided into four parts.The first part is a preliminary investigation of the general process of the fact-finding,including the comparative analysis,the theory of story model and the theory of narrative coherence.They provide a holistic perspective and way of thinking.The second part analyzes the specific reasons for the emergence of the particularity of the subjective truth discovery.Because subjective facts are indirectly observed and recognized,combined with its combined effect with other factors,and it presents complexity and particularity.The third part collates the relevant judicial interpretations and normative documents of our country and can reflect the appearance and problems in combination with the empirical research.On this basis,the original proposition is limited.In the fourth part,it is necessary to rediscuss some basic theoretical problems,and then analyze the different solutions,including how to judge indirect evidence to reach the standard,the applicable scope and system construction of presumption.