摘要
实证研究发现,“不证”或者“少证”似乎是中国刑事法官认定事实的主流态势,特别是在无证据争议的案件;只有在极少数存在证据争议的案件中,法官才会进行“细证”。总体上看,中国刑事法官运用证据认定事实的模式并非单一模式,而是多种模式并存。具体而言,在没有证据争议的案件中,普遍采用的是“拼图模式”;在有证据争议的案件中,一部分采用“拼图模式”对在案事实进行论证,而另一部分采用“印证+拼图”的综合性证据使用模式,即通过印证来解决争议证据信息指向的一致性问题,通过“拼图模式”来确保在案证据能够涵盖案件的全部要件事实。从长远看,需要持续打造更具中国特色的科学化刑事案件事实认定(证明)模式,并进行相关的理论构建。
How judges use evidence to do the fact-finding has become a research hotspot in criminal procedure law of China in recent years.Empirical studies show that"no fact finding"or"little fact finding"seems to be the mainstream trend,especilly in cases without evidence disputes,while"meticulous"fact finding only exists in very few cases with evidence disputes.Overall,Chinese criminal judges adopt not a single but multiple fact-finding modes in using evidence to find the fact of a case.Specifically,in cases without evidence disputes,the"jigsaw puzzle mode"is commonly used,while in cases with evidence disputes,some use the"jigsaw puzzle mode"to strengthen the proof of facts,while others adopt a comprehensive mode of"corroboration+jigsaw puzzle",that is,using"corroboration mode"to solve the problem of consistency of the direction of the disputed evidence information,and"jigsaw puzzle mode"to ensure that the evidence in the case sufficiently and comprehensively covers all the essential facts.In the long run,China needs to continue to create a more scientific criminal fact-finding(proof)mode with Chinese characteristics and carry out related theoretical constructions.
出处
《法学研究》
北大核心
2023年第3期188-204,共17页
Chinese Journal of Law
关键词
事实认定
法官心证
印证
拼图模式
实证研究
fact-finding
free evaluation of evidence
corroboration
jigsaw puzzle mode
empirical re-search
