Research On Judicial Credibility Of Criminal Trial Involving Judicial Psychiatric Appraisal

With the in-depth advancement of a new round of judicial reforms,the attention of all sectors of society on the issue of judicial credibility continues to heat up.Judicial credibility stems from the public's trust in judicial trials.The influence of the trial of the case with high social concern on judicial credibility is several times that of the ordinary case.The trial of criminal cases involving the judicial psychiatric identification of the accused is most likely to arouse public debate.Therefore,research on the judicial credibility of such trials has rich criminal litigation theory,judicial credibility theory,and the improvement of judicial psychiatric identification law,judicial psychiatric appraisal of criminal trial laws.The concept of judicial credibility in criminal trials involving judicial psychiatric identification is derived from the concept of judicial credibility based on deductive reasoning.Judicial credibility involves all trial systems;while judicial credibility of criminal trial involving judicial psychiatric appraisal refers to the public 's trust in the trial system of criminal cases involving judicial psychiatric appraisal and the judges under this system in performing their trial duties.In addition,the credibility of judicial psychiatric identification will have an important impact on the judicial credibility of criminal trials involving judicial psychiatric identification and the two are easily confused.It refers to the authoritative resources that judicial psychiatric identification itself has earned by winning the general trust of citizens.The inherent constitution of judicial credibility of criminal trials involving judicial psychiatric identification is derived from the theory of judicial credibility and the theory of criminal credibility.Due to the particularity of judicial psychiatric appraisal and criminal trial involving judicial psychiatric appraisal,the internal constitution of such judicial credibility is different from that of judicial credibility and criminal judicial credibility.The rationality of substantive law,the legitimacy of procedural law,the persuasiveness of judgment,and the heteronomy of judicature are the internal components of judicial credibility of criminal trial involving judicial psychiatric appraisal.Among them,the rationality of substantive law refers to the rationality of substantive law concerning the standards,procedures and other techniques of judicial psychiatric appraisal and substantive law concerning the rights,obligations and legal responsibilities of judicial psychiatric expertise.The legitimacy of the procedural law means that the procedural law concerning the criminal trial of judicial psychiatric appraisal can guarantee the substantial participation of both the prosecution and defense parties in the trial.The persuasion of the referee means that the judge must not only make a ruling,but also fully explain it to make the ruling consistent with substantive reason.Judicial heteronomy means that the higher court needs the assistance of the judicial administrative department when it supervises the criminal trial involving judicial psychiatric appraisal,and the supervision of public opinion plays a positive role in promoting the substantive supervision of the higher court.The destruction of judicial credibility in criminal trials involving judicial psychiatric appraisal includes: first,the substantive law of judicial psychiatric appraisal is uncertain,and there is no precise stipulation on the standards,procedures and rights,obligations and legal responsibilities of judicial psychiatric expertise.Secondly,the judicial psychiatric appraisal start right setting is unreasonable and the cross-examination is formalized.The parties do not have the right to start,and it is difficult for the appraiser to appear in court,which makes it difficult to make the cross-examination in the criminal trial of judicial psychiatric appraisal involving substance.Thirdly,the reason of the judgment document is not strong,the judge usually does not explain the reason of the decision and the reason of accepting the judicial psychiatric appraisal.Finally,due to the existence of the special evidence of judicial psychiatric appraisal,it is difficult for higher courts to carry out substantive supervision of criminal trials involving judicial psychiatric appraisal.In view of the existing problems,by comparing the relevant systems of criminal trials involving judicial psychiatric appraisal in common law countries and civil law countries,the ways to improve the judicial credibility of criminal trials involving judicial psychiatric appraisal include: Firstly,the guarantee of substantive law should be strengthened.The formulation and improvement of relevant substantive law should take legal knowledge and judicial psychiatry knowledge into consideration to improve the accuracy and operability of regulations.Secondly,we should strengthen the protection of the procedural law,grant the litigants the right to initiate judicial psychiatric appraisal,solve the difficulty of judicial psychiatric expertise in court,and set up a grading system for judicial psychiatric expertise.Thirdly,to strengthen the reasoning of the judgment documents,the judge must give a detailed explanation of the reasons for the decision and the reasons for accepting the expert opinion.Finally,the supervision mechanism of criminal trial involving judicial psychiatric appraisal should be improved.The judicial administrative department should assist the higher court in supervision,and the supervision of public opinion should be strengthened.