Research On The Issue Of Fact Finding In Judicial Adjudication From The Perspective Of Fiel

Facts are the logical starting point of judicial adjudication,and accurate determination of facts is the lifeline of fair justice.For those cases that have widely caused social controversy,such as the Peng Yu case and the Zhao Chunhua gun case,in essence,it is an error or omission in the determination of facts,resulting in the fact that the facts of the case finally determined by the judge do not conform to the objective truth.The research on the issue of fact determination has undergone a refined study from the grand narrative of the standard of authenticity of the determination of facts to how the facts are formed,but it has not gone deep into the specific context of how judges make fact determinations.By reviewing the microsubject of judges from a micro-perspective,we will have a more comprehensive understanding of the dilemma of fact determination caused by differences in capital and habits in different practice fields of judges.The purpose of studying the fact determination problem in judicial adjudication from the perspective of field theory is to find out the factors that affect the accuracy of fact determination under the guidance of different fields,capital and habits,so as to build a corresponding solution path for the influencing factors.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this article is divided into three parts,and then the content of each part is summarized one by one: the first part,by consulting and collecting relevant information on Bourdieu field theory,provides a basic overview of the core conceptual fields,capital,habits and judicial fields in field theory,providing a basic theory for subsequent analysis.It further demonstrates the legitimacy of field theory in the determination of facts in judicial adjudication.In the second part,the judge’s fact-determination behavior is analyzed from the perspective of "field-capital-habit",and the factors affecting the fact-determination process are derived: the current situation of "few cases" in the judicial field,the value conflict and media intervention in the social field,and the unreasonable performance appraisal indicators in the power field will have an impact on the judge’s fact determination strategy;Capital,which is the basis of the dynamics of field operations,also has an impact on the determination of facts.First of all,the evidentiary capital of the twogame game in the field of fact determination will affect the judge’s fact determination through the total amount of capital and weight;Second,the cultural and social capital of judges and lawyers will also affect the results of the determination of facts.Finally,the judge’s habit of shaping experience under the influence of the field rules,as well as the irrational thinking habits of the judges themselves,such as intuition,emotion,and imagination,will in turn have an effect on the field of fact determination.The third part,according to the influencing factors mentioned above,constructs a path for accurate factual determination from three levels: field and capital habits.At the field level,to reaffirm the subjectivity of judges and the factual argumentation system of judgment documents to balance the strength and weakness of each field,and to maximize the improvement of the judicial operation field;At the capital level,to weaken the competitiveness of economic and social capital,cultivate judges’ professional ethics,enhance judge symbol capital,and strengthen the capital that judges have in the field of fact determination;At the level of customary habits,judges’ habits are improved by shaping judges’ habits and judges’ self-correction by setting up judicial specialization.These three aspects are used to achieve the objectivity of the adjudication fact determination process and the accuracy and legitimacy of the fact determination results.