明代“强盗”案中亲属身份关系对司法裁断结果的影响——以《盟水斋存牍》中“杨维翰”案为例进行分析  

The Influence of Kinfolk on the Judicial Verdict in the“Robbery”Case in Ming Dynasty--A Case Study of“YANG Wei-Han”Case in Mengshuizhai Cundu

作　　者：石泉 SHI Quan(College of Chinese Language and Literature,Qing hai Normal University,Xining,Qinghai 810000,China)

机构地区：[1]青海师范大学人文学院,青海西宁810000

出　　处：《萍乡学院学报》2021年第4期65-68,107,共5页Journal of Pingxiang University

摘　　要：明代州县官员对辖下案件的审理结果始终力求有充分的证据支撑作为实现情理和法理双重标准下“信谳无疑”社会效果的关键因素。具体到“强盗”类案件,则要求对案中人行为责任的界定和惩处必须要兼顾物证搜集、证人证言、现场勘验笔录、主观认罪口供等诸多方面,并在此基础上参酌律文内容完成案件结论中刑罚施行方式选择和轻重程度的合理限定;但与此同时这也导致承审官员在实际分析案情过程中的主观视角以及进而所遵循的思维路径上出现了很大差异,集中表现为上述定罪量刑结果的不同和个人司法能力的高低。其中明代“杨维翰”一案“强盗”行为和亲属身份间矛盾竞合关系的突出特点,直接影响了官员间对于如何在兼顾二者的同时,使审理结果符合“情理两协,勿枉勿纵”标准要求这一问题上表现出不同的观点和争论。In the Ming Dynasty,legally sufficient evidence was taken as the key element to support the verdict of cases by prefecture and county officials in realizing the social effect of“verdict without doubts”under the emotional and legal principles.When it comes to robbery cases,it is required that the identification and penalty must take into account the collection of physical evidence,witness testimony,on-site inspection record,and subjective confession while referring to the legal provisions to decide the form of penalty and the scale of sentence in the conclusion of the case.But discrepancy,especially in conviction and sentence and judicial ability,may arise in the subjective perspective and the thinking path followed by the trial officer in the actual analysis of the case.In the case of YANG Wei-han,the trial officers,influenced by the contradictory co-opetition between the“robbery”and the kinfolk,showed disagreement in balancing the two and conforming the verdict to the principle of“giving consideration to both emotion and law and free from wrongful and conniving judgment”.

关 键 词：“杨维翰”案 矛盾竞合关系 思维路径 结果差异 司法效果 

分 类 号：D909.2[政治法律—法学理论]