辨认论文:辨认笔录的证据问题研究

辨认论文：辨认笔录的证据问题研究

【中文摘要】辨认是侦查过程中频繁运用的侦查措施, 通过笔录的形式固定下来的辨认笔录对案件事实的发生和认定更是具有不可取代的证明效用。但无论是中国还是外国, 由辨认笔录导致的错案也屡见不鲜, 其重要性和危险性不言而喻。我国《刑事诉讼法》尚未明确辨认笔录的证据地位, 这不仅仅使得辨认程序的规范不够完善, 也使得辨认笔录的地位无法得以确立, 立法上的阙如也造成了司法实践中的随意和混乱。本文旨在通过我国及其他国家和地区的辨认程序及笔录问题对比研究, 探讨我国关于辨认笔录问题的理论缺失和实践漏洞, 研究和规划辨认笔录的证据地位, 力图对制定相关的辨认规则和辨认程序的条文, 增强辨认的可操作性, 确立辨认笔录的证据资格及其作为证据使用的审查机制提出一定的理论价值和实践意义, 以期能够抛砖引玉。全文共分为五个部分, 主要内容如下：第一部分：辨认制度的基本理论问题, 包括辨认制度的理论基础和辨认制度的基本分类。首先从心理学的原理、哲学原理和同一认定原理为辨认规则寻找理论支撑；其次, 根据不同的标准对辨认进行了分类研究, 以考察不同类别辨认的规律和特点, 以助于构建完善的辨认规则和程序, 包括：庭审前辨认和当庭辨认, 证人辨认、被害人辨认和犯罪嫌疑人、被告人辨认, 直接辨认和间接辨认, 公开辨认和秘密辨认, 混杂辨认和单独辨认, 静态辨认和动态辨认。第二部分：中外辨认笔录证据问题研究, 主要从英国和美国, 俄罗斯、德国和意大利, 中国的港澳台地区三个部

分进行考察。在处理辨认笔录的证据能力问题上, 各国都予以关注, 美国对辨认笔录证据所持有的态度较为宽松, 允许以唯一的辨认证据治罪, 而不需要其他证据的支撑；英国注重直接证据, 辨认笔录作为证据使用的程序和形式规定十分严谨和细致；俄罗斯、意大利等国家则主要是通过对辨认笔录的形式和内容的规定来决定辨认笔录是否有证据能力, 明确规定了辨认笔录的证据资格地位, 并规定了严格笔录规则, 但同英国相比在操作方面的规定较为简单；. 德国在实践中要求的比较严格, 通过严格控制辨认过程, 达到实现辨认笔录证据价值的；我国大陆地区的规定相对来说比较混乱, 香港地区延续英美法的体制, 而澳门地区对辨认笔录的证据地位予以明确, 但操作程序规定相对较少。我国应取其所长坚持从实际出发, 结合我国自身的立法传统和法制现状, 寻求一条平衡而有效的路径。第三部分：辨认笔录的证据性质探讨, 主要从辨认笔录的证据能力和证明力两个方面评析辨认笔录的证据性质。在证据能力方面, 依次从客观性和合法性两方面进行分析, 明确应当赋予辨认笔录证据资格；在证明力方面, 从辨认主体、辨认对象、辨认实施程序及其他证据综合支撑四个方面评估影响辨认笔录真实性的因素。第四部分：中国辨认笔录的现状和分析, 主要从立法和司法两方面解读我国辨认笔录的现状。在立法方面, 从规范形式、规范内容和权利保障角度分析辨认笔录在立法上的缺位；在司法方面, 从公安机关的笔录制作和审判机关的笔录审查两方面进行分析。第五部分：辨认笔录作为证据的构建, 主要由三部分内容组成。首先, 建议在立法上明确辨认制度的法律地位以及辨认笔录的法定证据资格, 将

辨认笔录与勘验、检查笔录同归属于笔录型证据种类：其次, 在明确辨认笔录的证据资格的前提下, 构建辨认程序的证据形成规则, 主要从辨认前和辨认过程中两个部分细化和完善辨认规则, 并详细在缺失的规则中列出建议立法拟制条款内容；最后从辨认程序的启动机制, 辨认笔录的全面记录和审查规则, 庭审中辨认笔录的质证制度, 确立非法辨认笔录的证据排除规则, 确立辨认笔录的补强证据规则等五个方面完善辨认笔录作为证据使用的程序机制。

【英文摘要】Eyewitness identification is an important

means of investigation in the practice of criminal justice, and fixed by the form of the identifying notes has the irreplaceable testification effective for the facts of case. However, there are many criminal wrongful cases which caused by the wrongful identifying notes both in China and foreign. In our country, it has not yet been explicitly identified the criminal

procedure law of evidence and not reached a sufficient extent because of self problem, created the judicial practice of random and confused. This thesis attaches importance to study on fundamental issues of identifying notes, to found the

problem concerning the theory and practice, to clear the legal status and improve the rules of our system, focus on handling the case to establish the separation and identification rules, and strengthen the supervision of the activities to identify

in theoretical and practical significance, in order to use the little to get the big. The thesis consists of five parts.Part I, the basic the basic theoretical question of identification, including the basic theories and the classification of the identification.This part begins from the theory of psychology, philosophy and the same principle to find the theory support for rules of identification. Then, according to different standards to classify the identification to examine the various categories of the laws and characteristics, in order to build the perfect rules and procedures, includes, the identification in the pretrial and in court, the identification by attesters, that by the injured party and that by the crime suspected, the public identification and the secret identification, the

intermixed and the single identification, direct and indirect identification, static state or dynamic identification.Part II, the research on evidence issues of the identifying notes

between China and other nations, which mainly reviews from the British and the United states, Russia, Germany and Italy and Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan.As for the evidence capability, the United States holds the more liberal attitude, which allowed the identifying notes to convict alone without other evidences to support. The British focus on the direct evidence, using the

identifying notes as evidence is formed precise and detailed both in the procedures and provisions. Russia and Italy and other countries determine the evidence capability mainly

through the format and content of the provisions of identifying notes, and provide the legal status of the identifying notes clearly and set out in strict rules, however, compared with the British in provisions of the operation is relatively simple. Germany demands in practice strictly, through strict control of the identification process, to achieve recognition of the value of the evidence. The provisions of China are relatively chaotic. Hong Kong districts extend the common law system, and Macao provide the legal status of the identifying notes clearly, but the operating procedures is relatively little We should take them from reality with our own legislative traditions and legal status of legislation, to seek a balance and effective path.Part III, preparation and properties of the evidence issues concerning the identifying notes, which mainly expounds the location of the law of evidence based on the analysis of the competency of evidence and the testify. As for the evidence capability, this thesis develops it from its characteristics of objectivity and legitimacy, pointing out that the

identifying notes should have evidence qualification. As for

the probative force, this thesis develops from the

identification subject, the identification object, the

identification course, and the other evidences supporting the four assessments of the impact factors to assess the

authenticity of the identifying notes.PartⅣ, the situation and the analysis of the identifying notes in China, mainly from the legislative and judicial aspects to interpret the present situation of our country. In legislation, from the canonical form, standardizing content and rights protection perspective to analysis the absence of identifying notes in legislation; In the judicial part, this thesis analysis it from the notes production in the public security and the notes review in the judicial.Part Ⅴ, the procedural building of the identifying notes as the evidence, which includes three sections. First, it brings out the suggestions to provide the legal status of the identification clearly and the legal evidence captivity of the identifying notes, with the record of litigation and

inspection shall be vested in the same type of evidence.Second, on the premise that provide the legal status of the identifying notes, to build the rules of the evidence,especially in the parts of the pre-identification and the identification

procedure, and to recommend legislative fiction that listed in

the terms in the absence of the rule. Finally, this thesis recommends to improve the procedural mechanisms from the

perspective of the identifying notes, including the starting system, the overall record and the reviewing rules, the

cross-examination system, establishing the illegal recognize evidence exclusion rules and the record of evidence

corroborative rules.

【关键词】辨认 辨认笔录 证据地位 证据资格

【英文关键词】Identification Identifying Notes Evidence Status Evidence Capacity

【目录】辨认笔录的证据问题研究

8-10ABSTRACT 10-12引言中文摘要13-18(一) 研究辨认笔录的动因13-15

15-17(二) 辨认笔录的研究现状综述一、辨(三) 研究辨认笔录证据问题意义17-18

认制度的基本理论问题18-25

18-20(一) 辨认制度的基本分类182、证人辨认、被

3、直接辨认和间

5、混杂辨认

(二) 辨认制

2、哲学原理1、庭审前辨认和当庭辨认害人辨认和犯罪嫌疑人、被告人辨认接辨认19和单独辨认2018-194、公开辨认和秘密辨认19-206、静态辨认和动态辨认201、心理学原理21-22度的理论基础20-25

22-233、同一认定原理23-25二、中外辨认笔录证据问题比较研究25-32(一) 美国和英国辨认笔录证据问题考察

25-271、美国的辨认笔录证据问题25-262、英国的辨认笔录证据问题26-27

问题的考察27-30

27-28(二) 俄罗斯、德国、意大利辨认笔录1、俄罗斯的辨认笔录证据问题3、意大利的2、德国的辨认笔录证据问题28-29

29-30辨认笔录证据问题

分析30-32(三) 港澳台辨认笔录问题的考察和(一) 三、辨认笔录的证据性质探讨32-37

1、辨认笔录的客观性辨认笔录的证据能力分析33-35

33-342、辨认笔录的合法性34-35(二) 辨认笔录的证明力评析35-37四、中国辨认笔录的现状及分析37-40

(一) 辨认五、辨认笔录作为证据的程序性正当化建构40-60

笔录作为证据的设想

40-4140-431、确立辨认行为的法律地位(二) 构建辨2、辨认笔录证据地位的构想41-43

1、辨认前的规则认程序的证据形成规则43-51

43-462、辨认过程中的规则46-51

51-60(三) 完善辨认笔录作为证据的程序机制

51-52

52-541、完善辨认程序的启动机制2、完善辨认笔录的全面记录和审查规则3、确立庭审中辨认笔录的质证制度54-564、确立非法辨认笔录证据排除规则56-57

证据规则57-60

谢65-66结论60-615、确立辨认笔录的补强参考文献61-65致学攻读学位期间发表的学术论文目录66-67位论文评阅及答辩情况表67