Font Size: a A A

Empirical Study On The Scope Of Illegal Confession

Posted on:2020-07-14Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:H H HuFull Text:PDF
GTID:2416330572994231Subject:Procedural Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
Since ancient times,the confession has the "famous reputation" of the "king of evidence" in the evidence system for prosecution of crimes.It has also been in the "foundation" position in the evidence system,and has even become a symbol of successful investigation of cases.As a result,investigators often take a lot of methods to obtain confessions for the purpose of solving crimes,and many methods of obtaining confessions include illegal confessions such as extorting confessions,which leads to confessions.Legality disputes.However,judicial practice is nothing more than the best window to understand the scope of illegal confessions.This not only can truly reflect the effect of legal guidance on the text of illegal confessions,but also demonstrate the practice of illegal confessions.In view of this,this paper is based on an empirical perspective to study the scope of illegal confessions.This paper collects sample cases of the scope of illegal confessions through the methods of the referee and the law of Beijing University as an empirical research material.Based on the case study of the sample,this paper finds that the current courts have doubts about the illegal confessions,and that the problems are not allowed to be determined,and that there are difficulties,confusions,and the derailment of the normative texts and judicial practice.Respond with the norms and improve the scope of illegal confessions to better guide judicial practice.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this article is divided into four parts,the full text of about 35,000 words.The first part is mainly to sort out the scope of illegal confessions in the inductive normative text.Through the perspective of time to sort out the normative texts,combined with the views of relevant legislative figures and experts and scholars,it is found that there are mainly three types of illegal confessions in China's normative texts: they should be identified,should not be identified,and there is a blur between them.situation.Specifically,including the use of confessions by torture(repetitive confessions obtained by extorting a confession by torture),threats,unlawful restrictions on the confession of personal liberty,and the fact that the transcript of the interrogation is not signed by the accused is a situation that should be considered an illegal confession;The confession obtained by deception and the repetitive confession obtained by illegal means of obtaining confessions by torture are not considered to beillegal confessions.In addition,it also includes three types of interrogation transcripts as stipulated in Article 21 of the Evidence Provisions for Death Penalty Cases;the situation in the vague zone is mainly the question of whether the confession obtained by violating the location of the interrogation and interrogating the entire simultaneous audio and video recording should be considered as an illegal confession..The second part mainly examines the current status of the operation of the illegal confession from the perspective of judicial practice.Based on the collected sample cases of the scope of illegal confessions,we first conduct a general quantitative analysis,which provides an overview of the operation of the illegal confessions in judicial practice as a whole,and learns that there is a certain degree of over-regulation in both the defense and the court.The issue of text exclusion or identification of illegal confessions reflects the separation of norms and practices.On this basis,from the perspective of a typical case,explain how the court specifically grasps the three types of illegal confessions in the normative text.According to the three types of illegal confessions,the relevant typical cases are elaborated in turn,and it is known that in different situations,there is a problem that the current normative text should be deemed as an illegal confession without being identified,should not be identified,and finally recognized as an illegal confession.In addition,in the case of a vague zone,most courts generally identify such cases as illegal confessions,but the value base behind the reasons is not the same,reflecting the difference between process justice and outcome justice.Intense collision.The third part is to interpret the representative problems of judicial practice when identifying illegal confessions.This part is one of the key chapters of this paper.It is the combination of normative text and judicial practice.It is based on the above two chapters.According to the court's reasons for the court's handling of the confession of the confession in a typical case,it is clear that on the one hand,it can clearly find out that the court has a truth-based proof of proof when dealing with the legality of confession,basically by confession.Whether it is possible to obtain evidence of the evidence in the case and decide whether the confession is legal or not before,the human rights protection is not the value basis of the illegal confession exclusion rule,but the “added value” of discovering the reality of the entity and preventing the false and wrong case;Practice also shows that there is a problem of separation between norms and practice.This has the problems of regulating the text itself,such as the problem of unclear scope and narrow scope of illegal confessions,as well as theproblem of mechanical adaptation and the lack of judges' ability to interpret the law.The identification of illegal confessions in judicial practice is more confusing,and there is a problem of inconsistent standards of judicial judgment.These problems reflected in judicial practice require in-depth study of the theory and scientific improvement of the norms.At the same time,the beneficial results in judicial practice should also promptly summarize the normative documents that can be relied upon to better guide judicial practice against illegality.The identification of the confession.The fourth part is based on the feedback of empirical research.Through the perspective of comparative law,it actively draws on the successful experience outside the domain and proposes a perfect path that meets the scope of illegal confessions required by China's current judicial practice.First of all,it should be clarified that the rules for the exclusion of illegal confessions are based on human rights protection.The determination of illegal confessions is not necessary for the truthfulness of confessions.It is only based on whether the method of obtaining confessions violates human rights and violates the true will of the recipient.On this basis,the lure and deception will be included in the scope of the illegal confession.At the same time,avoiding contrary to the legal principle,as long as the negative impact of the previous illegal access method is not effectively “cleaned out”,the subsequent repetitive confession should be recognized as a continuation of the aforementioned illegal confession based on the law,and should be deemed as an illegal confession.Exclusion applies.In addition,in the longer term development,the supply of the mouth obtained in violation of the statutory interrogation procedure is deemed to be an illegal confession.This is the future development direction of the scope of illegal confessions in China.This is the proper meaning of the procedural justice principle,and it is also the reason for the judicial protection of human rights,especially considering the urgent need for the pre-trial interrogation environment in China.This is also in line with the prevailing practice of extraterritorial countries in demonstrating whether confession(confessions)stem from coercion.At present,due to the consideration of the actual situation of the country,an excessive strategy can be adopted.Firstly,the confessions obtained by several violations of the statutory interrogation procedure are clearly identified as illegal confessions,so as to distinguish the minor violations of the procedure and the adverse consequences of the excessive “face”.Procedural justice promotes substantive justice.
Keywords/Search Tags:illegal confession, sample cases, lure, deception, repetitive testimony, legal interrogation program, confirms the rule, human rights protection
PDF Full Text Request
Related items