我国非法证据的证明困境及其破解——从谢亚龙案件谈开  

Proof Predicament for Illegal Evidence in China and its Solution——Based on the Case of XIE Ya-long

作　　者：张弘[1] 张方[1] 

机构地区：[1]西安交通大学法学院,陕西西安710049

出　　处：《湖南警察学院学报》2013年第6期24-29,共6页Journal of Hunan Police Academy

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地2010年度重大项目"诉讼模式转型中的制度变迁--以刑事证据制度;辩护制度;执行制度为样本"(10JJD820011);浙江工商大学诉讼法研究中心项目"诉讼模式和证据规则研究"(DSS2011YB002)

摘　　要：被告人当庭翻供原因复杂,但多数翻供与刑讯逼供指控密切相关。新刑诉法确立了非法证据排除规则,但如何证明非法证据成为司法实务中的难题。我国目前的非法证据法定证明方法,实质属于自我证明。由于侦查封闭,缺乏外在监督,口供自愿性发生疑问时,非法证据的排除面临证明困境。要解决刑讯逼供的证明难题,应当设立律师在场权以及支持该制度的相关措施,包括制定讯问规则、扩大法律援助范围、废除刑法第三百零六条;同时完善录音录像制度以及增设推定法则。It＇s complicate for defendants withdrawing their confession on the trial, but most of reasons related to the torture complain. It is hard for both prosecutor and the defendant to prove weather the evidence is legal or not when the evidence being questioned, because the investigation is enclosed and lacking of supervision. The proof techniques in our criminal procedural law is self-proof. In order to overcome such problems of torture proving, we should enact some relevant rules, including that entitle to have an attorney present, inquire rules,enlarge the range of public founded legal aid service, abolish Article 306 of Criminal Law, improve audio and video recording rules and presumption rule.

关 键 词：非法证据 证明困境 自我证明 侦查封闭 律师在场权 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]