發(fā)布時間：2018-05-21 18:20

  本文選題：直接證據(jù) + 間接證據(jù)　； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：我國頒布實施的《關(guān)于辦理死刑案件審查判斷證據(jù)若干問題的規(guī)定》和《最高人民法院關(guān)于適用中華人民共和國刑事訴訟法的解釋》均明確規(guī)定了間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則，可見運用間接證據(jù)定案既切實可行，又具有重要作用。司法實踐中，辦案人員應(yīng)該轉(zhuǎn)變傳統(tǒng)辦案思維，與時俱進(jìn)，運用自身專業(yè)素養(yǎng)和能力準(zhǔn)確適用間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則。本文通過案例分析法、說理論證法、對比論證法等，嘗試體現(xiàn)司法實踐中運用間接證據(jù)定案的不可或缺性以及間接證據(jù)對直接證據(jù)的印證和補證作用的重要性。在此基礎(chǔ)上指出我國現(xiàn)階段適用間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則所面臨的困境及其自身所存在的問題，并為完善間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則提出一些建議。全文共分為五個部分，共約三萬二千字。 第一部分為間接證據(jù)概述。文章認(rèn)為，間接證據(jù)是指不能單獨而需要與其他證據(jù)結(jié)合才能證明案件主要事實的證據(jù)，指明“案件主要事實”是指“某人實施了某種犯罪行為”，即案件主要事實包含某人和某事，還通過具體案例詳細(xì)區(qū)分了直接證據(jù)與間接證據(jù)。文章總結(jié)的間接證據(jù)的基本特點包括以下幾點：證明作用的中立性、證明方式的推理性、證明過程的依賴性、證明范圍的廣泛性以及證據(jù)種類的多樣性。 第二部分為間接證據(jù)對直接證據(jù)的作用。文章認(rèn)為，間接證據(jù)可以印證和補證直接證據(jù)，通過間接證據(jù)提供的線索可以獲取直接證據(jù)。文章首先論述了直接證據(jù)自身內(nèi)在的缺陷無法避免，如果完全依靠直接證據(jù)定案就可能具有較大的定案風(fēng)險。文章再通過具體案例論述間接證據(jù)對直接證據(jù)的印證和補證可以彌補直接證據(jù)自身缺陷，降低定案風(fēng)險，提高直接證據(jù)的可靠性。 第三部分為間接證據(jù)獨立定案作用。這是本文的核心部分，主要論述間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則的具體內(nèi)容和根據(jù)間接證據(jù)定案應(yīng)采用“排除合理懷疑”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。文章先詳細(xì)論述了法律條文規(guī)定的間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則的具體內(nèi)容，還通過具體的案例來說明單獨使用間接證據(jù)定案的重要性和可行性。根據(jù)我國《刑事訴訟法》已確立“排除合理懷疑”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，論述間接證據(jù)采用“排除一切合理懷疑”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的不科學(xué)，指出采用“客觀真實性”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的不可行和需要貫徹執(zhí)行“排除合理懷疑”證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的原因和必要性。 第四部分為間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則運用的實踐困境。文章認(rèn)為，運用間接證據(jù)定案的過程中主要存在以下三點困境：一是“一對一”案件的困境。首先，完全依賴于直接證據(jù)，甚至有時偏向被告人或被害人一方的直接證據(jù)；其次，在“一對一”案件中，間接證據(jù)對直接證據(jù)的印證和補充作用未能發(fā)揮出應(yīng)有的作用，尤其是在案件的關(guān)鍵點和細(xì)節(jié)部分，未能找到足夠的間接證據(jù)予以印證。二是“證據(jù)體系”的困境，應(yīng)該考慮構(gòu)建“證據(jù)繩索式”的間接證據(jù)證明體系。三是“相互印證”證明模式困境，證據(jù)之間形成相互印證不能“為了印證而印證”。文章通過具體案件深刻剖析困境存在的原因，為實踐中存在的困境指明方向。 第五部分為我國間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則的完善。文章認(rèn)為，可以通過以下方法來完善間接證據(jù)定案規(guī)則：一是構(gòu)建合理的訴訟證明模式，采用“相互印證”證明模式為主，“自由心證”為輔的證明模式，還要充分發(fā)揮間接證據(jù)對直接證據(jù)的印證作用。二是貫徹實施“排除合理懷疑”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。辦案人員調(diào)查處理案件時應(yīng)轉(zhuǎn)變傳統(tǒng)辦案思維，摒棄“客觀真實”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，實施“排除合理懷疑”即達(dá)到“高度蓋然性”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)；三是重視邏輯推理和經(jīng)驗判斷的運用，，注重培養(yǎng)法官的專業(yè)素質(zhì)和辦案能力。
[Abstract]:The regulations on Several Issues concerning the examination and judgment of the death penalty cases and the interpretation of the application of the criminal procedure law in People's Republic of China by the Supreme People's court have clearly stipulated the rules of indirect evidence setting. It can be seen that the use of indirect evidence is practical and important. In judicial practice, the case is handled. People should change the traditional thinking of handling cases, keep pace with the times and apply their own professionalism and ability to accurately apply the rules of indirect evidence setting. This article tries to demonstrate the inability or lack of indirect evidence in judicial practice by case analysis, reasoning and comparison, and the evidence of indirect evidence in direct evidence. On the basis of this, this paper points out the difficulties faced by the current rule of indirect evidence setting in China and its own problems, and puts forward some suggestions for the improvement of the rules of indirect evidence setting. The full text is divided into five parts, with a total of about thirty-two thousand words.
The first part is the summary of indirect evidence. The article holds that the indirect evidence refers to the evidence that can not be combined with other evidence to prove the main facts of the case, indicating that "the main facts of the case" means "a person has carried out some kind of criminal act", that is, the main facts of the case include someone and something, and the detailed distinction between a specific case and a specific case. The basic characteristics of indirect evidence summarized in this article include the following points: the neutrality of the proof, the reasoning of the proof, the dependence of the process, the universality of the scope of proof and the diversity of the species of evidence.
The second part is the effect of indirect evidence on direct evidence. The article holds that indirect evidence can prove and supplement direct evidence, and direct evidence can be obtained through the clues provided by indirect evidence. In this paper, a case study is made to prove that indirect evidence can make up the defects of direct evidence, reduce the risk of the case, and improve the reliability of direct evidence.
The third part is the independent confirmation of indirect evidence. This is the core part of this article. It mainly discusses the specific content of the rules of the indirect evidence setting and the standard of proving the "reasonable doubt" according to the indirect evidence setting. The case of the body shows the importance and feasibility of using the indirect evidence set alone. According to the standard of proof of "excluding reasonable doubt" in the criminal procedure law of China, it is discussed that the indirect evidence is unscientific using the proof standard of "eliminating all reasonable doubts", and points out the infeasibility of adopting the proof standard of "objective reality". It is necessary to carry out the reason and necessity of "excluding reasonable doubt".
The fourth part is the practical predicament of the application of the indirect evidence order rules. The article holds that there are three difficulties in the process of using indirect evidence: one is the dilemma of "one to one". First, it is entirely dependent on direct evidence, even the direct evidence to the defendant or the victim; secondly, "one pair" In one case, indirect evidence does not play its due role in the evidence and supplement of direct evidence, especially in the key points and details of the case, and can not find sufficient circumstantial evidence to prove it. Two is the dilemma of the "evidence system", and the construction of an indirect evidence proof system of "evidence rope" should be considered. Three "Mutual proof" proves the plight of the model, and the evidence between each other can not be confirmed "for proof". The article deeply analyzes the reasons for the existence of the predicament through specific cases, and points out the direction for the predicament in practice.
The fifth part is the perfection of the rules of indirect evidence setting in China. The article believes that the following methods can be used to improve the rules of the indirect evidence setting: one is to build a reasonable proof model of litigation, adopt the proof model of mutual proof, and "free evidence" as the supplementary proof, and give full play to the direct evidence to direct evidence. Two is to carry out the proof standard of "eliminating reasonable doubt". When investigating and handling cases, the case handling personnel should change the traditional thinking of handling cases, abandon the proof standard of "objective truth", implement the proof standard of "eliminating reasonable doubt", that is "high probability", and the three is the application of logical reasoning and experience judgment. Pay attention to training the professional quality of the judge and the ability to run a case.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 周洪波;;證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)視野中的證據(jù)相關(guān)性——以刑事訴訟為中心的比較分析[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2006年02期

2 阮堂輝;王暉;;“孤證”或證據(jù)“一對一”的困境及其出路破解[J];湖北社會科學(xué);2008年05期

3 陳瑞華;;論證據(jù)相互印證規(guī)則[J];法商研究;2012年01期

4 韓東成;;論我國刑事印證證明模式[J];廣州市公安管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2008年02期

5 龍宗智;;薄熙來案審判中的若干證據(jù)法問題[J];法學(xué);2013年10期

6 張堅,薛喜堂;刑事直接證據(jù)和間接證據(jù)實踐研究[J];江蘇社會科學(xué);1995年02期

7 龍宗智;我國刑事訴訟的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];法學(xué)研究;1996年06期

8 龍宗智;印證與自由心證——我國刑事訴訟證明模式[J];法學(xué)研究;2004年02期

9 李建明;;刑事證據(jù)相互印證的合理性與合理限度[J];法學(xué)研究;2005年06期

10 黃鑫;;淺議間接證據(jù)在刑事訴訟中的作用和使用規(guī)則[J];蘭州教育學(xué)院學(xué)報;2012年05期

本文編號：1920257