Criminal Auxiliary Evidence Research

Although auxiliary evidence is not directly related to the case,there is also a big difference in the way of proving the credibility of the substantial evidence that can be verified in auxiliary evidence,namely that the substance of the evidence adoption is a model of identification between the evidence,and the supporting evidence is the truth of the substantial evidence in the external way.These in I don’t know if I’m going to model external their own characteristics,model between the substantially evidence tag model additional security on the first floor,or real evidence formed between the evidence chain sit and wait auxiliary evidence kinds doubts about the evidence as one’s real security or the weak credibility.However,there is little supporting evidence in Japanese studies,and the theoretical basis is weak.Therefore,strengthening the study of supporting evidence plays an important role in reconciling theoretical misunderstandings and enhancing the evidence system under the code of criminal procedure,as well as in clarifying the facts of the case and in the occurrence of false charges.There are also differences in the use of supporting evidence.There are different rules of evidence depending on the substantive evidence.For example,a witness’ s testimony in question in a case can be used to observe and corrode the witness’ s testimony in court.In Japan,there is not enough theoretical research on supporting evidence,but also insufficient legislative support,which leads to confusion in the use of supporting evidence in judicial practice.Academics place more emphasis on supporting evidence than on the study of other evidence,emphasis on mutual verification of other evidence,and neglect of external evidence.The lack of legislation is evident in the lack of provision of supplementary evidence in the criminal procedure code.The issue of evidence in judicial practice is universal,with some local courts having a rough chain of custody of physical evidence and often failing to have witnesses present at the trial of a case.Supplemental evidence is insufficient in theoretical research and insufficient in theoretical guidance in practice,which has made some local trials formalized and failed to effectively prevent false accusations.Of course,this situation has something to do with the shortcomings of our judicial system.First,the evidence presented by the parties is dependent on the judge.Second,investigators as part of a probe into illegal practices silence,of phenomena,auxiliary evidence to build realistic significance to build a auxiliary evidence also needs preconditions: first,but the country’s judicial system complementary,adding: "we will build a strong auxiliary evidence provide institutional support.Second,it complements legislation and supports legislation so that supporting evidence can be used in judicial practice.In addition,the supporting evidence should be supplemented by the existing eight types of statutory evidence.One is the storage chain of physical evidence.Second,there are multiple ways of proving when a document is questioned.Third,when electronic or audiovisual data is questioned,it is possible to prove its authenticity by its own characteristics or by the method of a witness.Fourth,it is desirable to ensure the presence of witnesses in a trial.If there is a doubt in the witness’ s testimony,the character of the witness is cited,and the witness’ s attitude evidence and evidence of the witness’ s criminal record are provided in the trial.Fifth,the record of the defendant’s statement,the legality of the defendant’s statement,the state of the defendant at the time of trial,and the presence or absence of a previous conviction are ensured.That following auxiliary evidence proof standards complete,law specified by evidence to the certificate that should be reached into the benchmark other the game prove an advantage if he is the benchmark..