论重复性供述排除之例外的拓展  

On the Extension of Exceptions to the Exclusion of Repeated Confessions

作　　者：许志敏 Xu Zhimin(Anhui University,Hefei,230601,Anhui)

机构地区：[1]安徽大学,安徽合肥230601

出　　处：《湖南警察学院学报》2023年第6期88-99,共12页Journal of Hunan Police Academy

基　　金：2022年国家社科基金项目“企业合规附条件从宽制度研究”;2022年安徽大学法学院“硕士研究生优质生源创新项目”(M080148001)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：我国《刑事诉讼法》对重复性供述确立了“原则加例外”的排除模式,对这一规则立法本意的不同理解使得实践中对重复性供述排除与否的判断路径在当然地走向依法依规之外还出现了由法院例外裁量的新方向,随之而来的是对裁量不予排除恰当性的质疑。判断裁量例外是否恰当,应当以是否符合重复性供述排除规则的作用原理为基准。再次合法讯问是先前刑讯逼供和后续供述之间的介入因素,其能够稀释刑讯逼供行为对二次供述的影响,除两种法定例外情形能够大幅提升合法讯问的稀释力度外,“辩护律师有效介入”也有此功效,但讯问间隔时间的长短、同步录音录像等因素则作用有限,应适时将前者上升为法定例外以满足实务需求,并否定后者作为排除例外的适当性。The Criminal Procedure Law of our country has established the exclusion mode of "principle plus exception" for repetitive confession.Different interpretations of the legislative intention of this rule makes the judgment path of the exclusion or not of repetitive confession naturally move to the law and the new direction of the court's exceptional discretion in practice,which is followed by the question of the appropriateness of not excluding the discretion.The appropriateness of discretionary exceptions should be based on whether it conforms to the principle of action of the exclusion rule of repeated confession.Second legal interrogation is an intervening factor between prior torture and subsequent confession,which can dilute the influence of forced confession by torture on the second confession.In addition to the two legal exceptions that can greatly enhance the dilution of legal interrogation,"effective intervention of defense lawyers" also has this effect,but the length of interrogation interval and synchronous recording and video recording have limited effects.The former should be elevated to statutory exception in time to meet the practical needs,and the latter should be denied as an appropriate exception.

关 键 词：重复性供述 毒树之果 稀释规则 使用禁止 例外规定 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]