“全国首例非法证据排除案”法理研判  

A Legal Analysis of the First Case of Illegal Evidence Exclusion in China

作　　者：万毅[1] 

机构地区：[1]四川大学法学院

出　　处：《证据科学》2011年第6期657-666,共10页Evidence Science

基　　金：教育部"新世纪优秀人才支持计划"资助项目(NCET-10-0602)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：全国首例非法证据排除案反映出非法证据排除规则在实践操作中需注意概念、效力、标准、程序四个重要的技术问题。非法证据是以严重侵犯人权的非法方法收集的证据,实践中要注意区分非法证据与瑕疵证据,切勿将非法证据误判作瑕疵证据。就效力而言,非法证据排除规则的"射程"应当及于侦查前程序。就判断标准来讲,除典型的刑讯逼供行为之外,疲劳审讯也应当纳入"等"字所指范畴予以禁止,而突破社会基本道德底限的威胁、引诱、欺骗性取证也应作为非法证据予以排除。在程序上审查非法证据,应当坚持举证责任倒置的原则,由控方承担证明证据取得具有合法性的举证责任,被告方仅承担"争点形成责任",同时控方应当举证证明至"排除合理怀疑"的程度。he First Case of Illegal Evidence Exclusion in China reflects four important technical issues about the Exclusionary Rule of Illegally Obtained Evidence in the judicial practice. The Firstone is the conceptual issue. The illegal evidence is the evidence which is obtained by seriously violating human rights. We need to pay attention to distinguish the illegal evidence and the defective evidence. The second is the effectiveness issue. The range of the exclusionary rule should be traced back to the procedure prior to investigation. The third is the standards issue. In addition to the typical behavior of torture, the fatigue trial should also be banned. The evidence obtained by the method of threat, inducement and fraud which break the basic moral bottom line of the society should also be excluded as the Illegal Evidence. The fourth is the procedure issue. The principle of inversion of onus probandi should be adopted in the processing of reviewing the illegal evidences. The burden of proof is shifted to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the behavior of evidence collecting is legal. The defense is only assumed to have ＂the resnonsibilitv of issue formation＂.

关 键 词：非法证据 瑕疵证据 举证责任 争点形成责任 案例研究 

分 类 号：D915.13[政治法律—诉讼法学]