On The Rule Of Corroboration To Confession

For a long time,confession was considered the most important evidence in judicial practice and was called "the king of evidence".However,with the progress of society and the soundness of the rule of law,people have gradually found that this is a serious overestimation of the value of confession evidence.This overestimation,on the one hand,has led to a large number of miscarriages of justice,affecting the realization of judicial justice;On the other hand,it has also led to the practice of violent,deceived,lure and other illegal means to obtain confession of the frequent,violating the suspect or the defendant's human rights seriously.Therefore,based on the dual considerations of maintaining justice and safeguarding human rights,the rule of corroboration to confession can be established and gradually improved.This paper is aimed at the rule of corroboration to confession,and consists of three chapters:The first chapter is an overview of the rules of corroboration to confession.In the first section,I introduce the concept and characteristics of confession.Confession has a broad interpretation and a narrow interpretation,the difference between the two is mainly reflected in whether it is a direct and complete recognition of the crime.As the narrow interpretation of the confession and "the defendant confession" which is one of the legal evidence types in china have the same connotation,it can be identified in China's approval of narrowly interpretation.The narrow interpretation of the confession has three essential characteristics: First,the subject is limited to the suspect and the defendant;second,the confession must include the recognition of the basic facts of the crime;third,the confession should be made to a person with judicial function after the commencement of the criminal procedure.In addition,the confession has authenticity doubts,repeatedly volatile,diverse forms and other non-essential features.In the second section,I define the concept of the rule of corroboration to confession.In this process,there are four issues need to be clear: first,"confession" of the rule should be the narrow interpretation;second,the content of the rule of corroboration to confession is mainly based on two kinds of evidence,one is confession,the other is reinforcing evidence,of the two kinds of evidence,confession is the main evidence,and reinforcing evidence is attached to the confession;third,differentiate and analyse the concept of reinforcement with mutual confirmation and correction;forth,the rule of corroboration to confession is probative force of the rules.In the third section,I summarize the value of the rule of corroboration to confession,that is,to ensure that the confession is true and reliable,to ensure that the facts of the case are properly identified,and to prevent partial confession,protection of human rights and so on.The second chapter is the study of some problems in the application of the rule of corroboration to confession in China.In the first section,I clarify the legal origin of the rule of corroboration to confession in China.That is,article 53 of the Criminal Procedure Law is the principle of self-evident evidence rules;in addition,Article 106 of Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China is also the important legal origin of the rule of corroboration to confession.In the second section,based on our legislation,I clarified the framework of the rule of corroboration to confession.First of all,on the scope of confession that needs to be reinforced,I believe that in our country,the confession whether is made in the court or made outside the court,needs to be reinforced.Secondly,on the scope of reinforcing evidence,I believe that in our country,reinforcing t evidence must be related to the facts of the case,with evidence ability and probative force,and independent of confession.Thirdly,on the proof of object of reinforcing evidence,in academia,there are Corpus delicti said and the Substantial said.Combined with our legislation and judiciary,I believe that China is more appropriate to use the Substantial said.Finally,on the degree of reinforcement,I think that this is I think this is the same problem with the proof of object of reinforcing evidence.At the same time,At the same time,there is a need to make it clear that reinforcing evidence also needs to be excluded from reasonable doubt in determining the facts of the case.The third chapter is about the accomplice confession of the special application of the rule of corroboration to confession in China.In the first section,I reclassify the joint offence according to whether violates the same legal interest,that is,the same crime,the dissent crime and the single crime.In the second section,I clarify the nature of the accomplice confession of the three types of joint offenses.For "the same crime",regardless of whether it is in the same procedure,the accomplice confession should be characterized as the confession of the defendant.For “the dissent crime”,regardless of whether it is in the different procedure,the accomplice confession should be characterized as witness testimony.For “the single crime”,the accomplice confession should be characterized as witness testimony.In the third section,I discuss the problem whether the accomplice confession reinforces each other.For “the same crime”,in the absence of other evidence,the accomplice confession could not reinforce each other.For “the dissent crime”,the accomplice confession could reinforce each other after mutual corroboration by other evidence.For “the single crime”,the accomplice confession could reinforce each other after the cross-examination procedures.