评聂树斌案再审判决回避王书金兼论《刑事诉讼法》第242条之修改

发布时间：2018-03-21 08:00

本文选题：聂树斌　切入点：再审判决　出处：《中外法学》2017年05期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：王书金自认真凶,启动并推动了复查程序,亦应对再审改判发生重要影响。但聂树斌案再审判决则以"王某一案不属于本案审理范围"为由,避开了对王书金自认真凶这一证据事实的评价。这一做法虽符合审理对象特定性的要求,且可避免与王书金案裁判的明显冲突,但妨碍了改判理由充分性及裁判方式正当性,亦不能避免与王书金案裁判的"实质冲突"。为保证对案件的充分审理,根据证据相关性和审判法庭独立性原则,因本案事实认定需要,可以对证明非本案嫌疑人、被告人的人可能系本案作案人的证据进行法庭调查和证据评价。张辉、张高平案再审判决可做范例。现行《刑事诉讼法》第242条第1项对新证据的规定,证明标准过高,不利于保障人权、纠正冤错。应借鉴相关法例予以修改。
[Abstract]:Wang Shujin identified himself as the culprit, initiated and promoted the review process, and should also have an important impact on the revision of the retrial. However, the judgment of the retrial in Nie Shubin's case was based on the fact that "Wang's case is not within the scope of this case." It avoids the evaluation of the evidence fact that Wang Shu-jin has identified himself as the true culprit. Although this practice meets the specific requirements of the trial object, and can avoid obvious conflict with the judge in Wang Shu-jin 's case, it hinders the adequacy of the reason for the revision and the legitimacy of the judgment method. In order to ensure the full hearing of the case, according to the principles of the relevance of evidence and the independence of the trial court, because the facts of this case are found to be necessary, it is necessary to prove that the case is not a suspect in this case. The defendant's person may be the evidence of the perpetrator of the case for court investigation and evaluation of evidence. Zhang Hui, Zhang Gao Ping's retrial judgment may serve as an example. Article 242, item 1, of the current "Criminal procedure Law" stipulates that the standard of proof for new evidence is too high. Not conducive to the protection of human rights, to correct wrongs and wrongs. We should use the relevant laws to amend them.
【作者单位】：四川大学法学院;
【分类号】：D920.5;D925.2

【相似文献】

评聂树斌案再审判决回避王书金 兼论《刑事诉讼法》第242条之修改

评聂树斌案再审判决回避王书金兼论《刑事诉讼法》第242条之修改