The Problems In The Application Of The Criminal Evidence Verification Rules And Their Overcoming

The first word appeared in June 15,1987,the Supreme People's Court on whether the people's court in the trial of the use of human leukocyte resistance to the original paternity test approved.In 2004,Professor Long Zongzhi put the criminal proof mode summed up as "mutual proof verification mode",since then,confirms the rules of 10493,become the focus of academic research in china.In 2010 the Supreme People's court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate,Ministry of public security,state security and the Ministry of justice "on the judge for review of Death Penalty Cases Provisions on some issues of evidence"(hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations" of evidence in death penalty cases)and 2012 "the supreme people's Court Interpretation on the application of the" People's Republic of China law of criminal procedure "(hereinafter referred to as the" criminal procedure explain ")will prove rules stipulated in the comprehensive review of the evidence,all kinds of identification and judgment,comprehensive review of the evidence,the status of proof in judicial proof of the rules recognized by the authority.However,due to the imperfect system of standardized rules confirms its limitations,confirms the theory is not sufficient,there are a lot of problems in practice,including in the blind spot there is one " evidence in the case;in practice,often with " evidence " and " reinforcement " and other words are mixed;examination and judgment of evidence of individual.Reasonable limits of the court of overthrowing confession and testimony and confirmed the adoption to review the cases of unknown,evidence is sufficient,over reliance on direct evidence and confirmed in the process of simple superposition,tend to ignore the evidence of guilt to exclude reasonable doubt.At present,the theoretical circles indulge in the "verification mode" of the abolition of the dispute,as well as the exploration of the new model of proof,but rarely look into the judicial practice to verify the application of the dilemma faced by the rules.In this paper,through the case analysis and literature research method,on the basis of the confirmation theory,this paper discusses the problems in the practice of verification rules,and through technical analysis to find out the countermeasures.In addition to the introduction,the text is divided into four parts.The full text of thirty-five thousand words.The first part of the proof of the meaning of textual research,and the contents of the interpretation.To confirm the meaning of the law and the judicial interpretation there are provisions.The representative view of the theoretical circles is Professor Long Zongzhi's analysis of the literal meaning,as well as the definition of the role and function of Professor Li Jianming.Based on the above point of view,we can see that the "confirmation" should refer to the judicial staff according to whether they contain the same information between any supportive evidence and evidence(can confirm each other),the examination and judgment of individual evidence is true and reliable,can be adopted,and according to the evidence of the case judgment is clear,whether the a rule.It includes two levels of content: first,to determine the evidence of a single evidence to prove the strength of the rules,including the defendant confession,witness testimony,the testimony of special words of evidence.The two is to determine the evidence is true and sufficient proof rules,the evidence is direct and indirect evidence of two types of evidence,that is nothing more than that between direct evidence and indirect evidence and indirect evidence confirms.In the second part,the main problems existing in the practice of the confirmation rules are analyzed.There are three main aspects of the confirmation rules in practice: the first is to confirm the blind spot of the rules.The mechanical seal is used,resulting in a lot of "one to one" evidence opposition or confession(turn card)in the case of loss of proof rules used in many of the cases in the judicial practice is difficult to identify.The two is to confirm the rules of error.The provisions of China's lack of systematic rules of evidence,judicial practice will prove the rules and corroboration,evidence of the case mix of many words.Three is to verify the application of the rules dilemma.Confirm the externality and objectivity,the facts verified features were too obsessed with proof rules in the evaluation of individual evidence,appeared in court retracted(turn card)to confirm the adoption of reasonable limits,the problem is unknown;in the evaluation of all the evidence is sufficient,the "evidence of guilt mechanical superposition" the fact that the tendency "heavy card,light row of doubt",easily lead to occurrence of miscarriages of justice.The third part analyzes the reasons for the problems of the confirmation rules.In practice,the rule confirms the reason why these problems,in addition to the limitations of the rule itself(that must have two or more contain the same information,and separate evidence)confirmed with heart syndrome(on the experience rule and logic rule exclusion),as well as by institutional factors.By confirmed applicable rules of the institutional factors mainly include "confession centralism" of investigation,"the file centralism" judgment mode.The former violates the natural law that the corroboration rule should follow,which directly leads to the superposition error.The latter is difficult to provide support for the verification rules,leading to difficult to complete the verification certificate.In the fourth part,some suggestions are put forward to overcome the problems in practice.Only the systematic and reasonable rules can be found out of the error.Only pay attention to the development and application of the chain set to break the rules applicable to determine the dilemma.Only the combination of the card can eliminate the blind spot of the rules.Only by perfecting the procedure can we guarantee the effective verification of the evidence and prove the completion.These four aspects interact with each other,so as to ensure that the judicial staff in our country are more accurate,scientific,reasonable and reasonable in the examination of the individual evidence and the determination of the facts of the case.