| With the progress of the construction of the rule of law society in China,the relevant laws on the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence have been constantly improved.However,from the plea bargaining to the investigative strategy,restricted by the actual conditions and other factors,in the judicial practice,if the criminal suspects with superior anti reconnaissance means want to make a breakthrough in the case,Investigators may be in pursuit of human rights in the growing tide of calls to carefully grasp the scale of investigation techniques,or easily fall into a state of inaction.Due to the high cost of violation of the law and the vigorous promotion of the process of rule of law,the means of extorting confession by torture and other illegal official confession have been gradually eliminated.However the exclusion rules of obtaining confession by deception,inducement.threat and other methods are difficult to distinguish from the investigation methods in judicial practice due to the lack of specific implementation rules and comparison standards,And because of the restriction of traditional judicial concept,the obstacle evidence collection and testimony,the limitation of judicial system,the serious shortage of police force at the grass-roots level and so on,in judicial practice,the exclusion requirements for obtaining confession by illegal means other than information are largely illusory.The wide application of big data in modern society promotes the development of traditional investigation.People’s whereabouts began to become "traceable",and the application analysis of big data has been transformed into a sharp tool to fight against crime.However,under the influence of objective factors and the operation procedures of the national judicial system,it is unrealistic to change the current judicial situation of confession centralism in a short time.This paper will obtain the elimination of confession by deception,inducement and threat Starting with the characteristics of legislative evolution of rules and the results of judicial practice research,this paper analyzes the phenomenon that the current concept system,specific operation and other aspects cause the absence or virtual existence of the exclusion rules,and compares the relevant provisions of foreign countries on the exclusion rules provided by the method of"deception,inducement and threat",This paper explores the application of the exclusionary rules of obtaining confession by deception,inducement and threat in judicial practice.Through this research and analysis,it is hoped that it will have a certain reference significance for the application of the exclusionary rules of obtaining confession by deception,inducement and threat in judicial practice.Through this research and analysis,it is hoped that it will have a certain reference significance for application of the exclusionary rules of obtaining confession by deception,inducement and threat in future judicial practice.This study first summarizes the legal literature in the field of exclusion rules provided by the method of"deception,inducement and threat",selects the representative literature and relevant academic reports in this field as the theoretical reference,expounds the research ideas,so as to pave the way for the development of this paper ’s analysis and research.Then,it expounds the current legislative and judicial status of the exclusion rules of obtaining confession by means of "deception,inducement and threat",expounds the current trend of the gradual improvement of the relevant laws of illegal evidence exclusion from the evolution characteristics of the relevant laws and legislations.At the same time,from the aspects of law enforcement concept,burden of proof,judicial identification and other specific research data,This paper lists the problems in the application of the exclusionary rules of confession obtained by the method of "deception,inducement and threat" in judicial practice.Then it analyzes the causes of the application dilemma,from the conflict of multiple value objectives in the concept of law enforcement for a long time to the current situation in the judicial system and the operation of the procedure,which results in the disadvantageous exclusion.Based on the system experience of foreign countries on the exclusion rules of confession obtained by the method of "deception,inducement and threat",this paper puts forward relevant suggestions on how to better implement the exclusion rules of confession obtained by the method of "deception,inducement and threat" in China’s judicial practice,from the aspects of changing the concept of the Department,strict judicial determination,strengthening judicial supervision,etc. |
