Pragmatic Analysis And Logical Construction Of Verbal Evidence

Verbal evidence is the most important evidential factor that lead to miscarriages of justice.However,verbal evidence play an important role both in law and legal practice,mechanism of action of verbal evidence in affirmation of fact must be cleared to prevent miscarriage of justice.Verbal evidence is kind of knowledge of the case fact from the perspective of epistemology,the process of providing verbal evidence is also a process of delivering knowledge,and a process of communication between speaker and audience.The success of knowledge delivering depends on the sufficient communication between speaker and listener.Reductionism and anti-reductionism of testimony defence adopt a mode of subject-object dichotomy and rule out communication between speaker and listener,however,this mode made the testimony defence in a dilemma.Chinese criminal trial adopt a mode of "file-transcript-centrism",which break the mode of Equality between Prosecution and Defense,and judge's neutrality,it doesn't protect the right to defense of defendant,defendant is "absent" in trial.The subsequent result is that the judge has to make a case affirmation based on file-transcripts merely,without any communication with other participants.The institution also adopt the mode of subject-object dichotomy,verbal evidence and case fact as the object,and the judge as a lonely cognize subject,but it always lead to error of investigation of verbal evidence and case fact affirmation.This article suggests that we need to turn to pragmatic to solve the dilemma caused by the mode of subject-object dichotomy.When we are talking pragmatic in the process of judging verbal evidence,we are advocating a perspective of inter-subjectivity,emphasizing the decisive effect of communication between trial participants on the cross-examination conclusion and eventual case fact affirmed,besides,pragmatics ask us to rethink the degree of rationality of the process of communication.Certain rules must be asked for a reasonable communication between trial participants.These rules include communicative rules for trial participants,and rules about affirmation of fact,and it's the goal of this thesis to find out.This thesis is divided into four parts,the first part will analyze the situation of evidence in miscarriages of justice,find a new way of thinking to estimate the credibility of verbal evidence by doing a epistemological investigation;In second part,I,d like to make the pragmatic process clear in cross-examination,and the rules asked;The follow parts are expansion of the logic rules mentioned in second part,the third part,explore the internal logic of evidence,the basic request of evidence,in other words,include legality,relevance and credibility;The forth part,explore the logic of constructing case fact,include the logic of argument according to verbal evidence,and the logic argument according to among evidences.