Research On Induced Confessions

Oral confession,as an important form of evidence,was once known as the king of evidence.Since ancient times,there are many ways and means of evidence collection,especially criminal information and intimidation.With the rise of modern human rights concept,people gradually abandon the way of torture,and the threat has been banned by law.However,only the temptation to swim between the legal and illegal is uncertain.There is no uniform standard for the existence and abolition,use and elimination of induced confession.However,various academic and practical views are emerging in this kind of controversial issues In the circumstances,the legislative attitude towards induced confession is becoming increasingly vague.In 2012,China has always been using the same kind of Induced Confession as torture to extort confession and threatening.However,after 2012,with the revision of criminal procedure law,the status of induced confession and threat is no longer equal.Although all three are forbidden in the way of obtaining evidence,the induced confession has not obtained the same law as torture and threat The status of legal consequences,that is,the confession result is also forbidden to be used as evidence,so the induced confession is put into an awkward situation where the confession is forbidden,but the confession result is not necessarily prohibited.In order to solve this awkward situation,this paper takes history as the cut-out,through the comparison of value measurement,tries to make a comprehensive analysis of the Induced Confession from four aspects:the overview of the induced confession,the legal status of the induced supply,the value conflict of the induced supply,the basic conception of the induced supply governance.The first part,through the Historical Tracing of the concept of seduction,starts from the Tang Dynasty,then to the practical application of the technique of intimidation and treachery in Song Dynasty,and finally,combining the judicial cases of Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China,the concept model of ancient seduction is obtained.Then,according to this concept model,it compares with the various views of domestic academic and practical sessions on the concept of seduction,and finally tries to make a tentative analysis The concept of induced confession is deconstructed completely,and the constitutive elements,characteristics and behavior types of induced confession are obtained.The second part first introduces the legal status of induced confession in China,From the beginning of the founding of China,China has taken the judicial attitude towards the induced confession,and then through various legislative activities of China on the Induced Confession since 1979,combined with the judicial judgment documents related to the problem of Induced Confession,the author concludes that the legal status of induced confession in China is facing the problem of "existence and death",and tries to analyze the causes of the problem.Finally,according to the legislation and judicial situation of Britain,the United States,Germany and Japan,the author concludes that there is no definite legal system about the Induced Confession.Only because of the different historical and cultural traditions of each country,it has created such a situation.Moreover,there are positive and negative aspects between various legal systems about Induced Confession,and there is no good or bad distinction between them.The third part explains the rationality of the existence of confession by the convenience of obtaining confession and the inseparability of confession behavior and interrogation strategy.The value of confession is the positive value of confession.Then,combined with the views of Bentham and Kant in the west,Mozi and Yang Zhu in China,this paper analyzes the conflict between the positive and negative values of inducement,and finally comes to the conclusion that the right and wrong of inducement depends entirely on the choice of different values rather than judicial practice The right and the wrong in the world.At present,our country has adopted a vague legislative attitude on the value judgment of confession inducement,but it is also a value choice to break away from the perspective of dualism.Only because the system design is not perfect,it indirectly leads to the dilemma of confession inducement.The fourth part is to change the present situation of induced confession in China and perfect the relevant rules of induced confession in combination with the actual situation of our country.Firstly,the author proposes the standard of determining the illegality of the induced confession based on the reliability of confession,and explains the relationship between the standard and the value of procedural justice and the justice of the law.Finally,it is proposed that under the existing judicial policy,the supporting system of the rules of decoy and exclusion already has a certain realistic material foundation,for example,the full coverage system of criminal lawyer defense and the system of legal aid on duty lawyer have established the system of lawyer’s full participation in the system of lawyer presence.The reform of the case handling place nationwide is to improve the synchronous recording and recording system It laid a material foundation.