以威胁、引诱、欺骗方法获取口供的排除标准探究

发布时间：2018-04-30 00:09

本文选题：威胁 + 引诱　；参考：《法商研究》2016年06期

【摘要】：我国学术界和实务界主流的观点是以威胁、引诱、欺骗方法获取的口供不应一概排除,仅在符合特定条件时才应排除。在我国立法和理论上都未构建合理的非法获取的口供排除标准,而学者主张构想的自白任意性标准、合法性标准、合理性标准均存在一定缺陷的情况下,为使非法获取的口供排除标准具有实效性,可将可靠性标准作为非法获取的口供排除的基本标准,并以必要性标准作为补充性标准。可靠性标准,是指考查采用威胁、引诱、欺骗方法获取口供是否会导致犯罪嫌疑人作虚假认罪,其具体判断要点在于考查侦查人员采用威胁、引诱、欺骗的方法所产生的心理强制力是否过度;而在判断心理强制力是否过度时,犯罪嫌疑人的自身情况也必须予以考虑。必要性标准,是指当侦查人员采用威胁、引诱、欺骗的方法足以使犯罪嫌疑人作虚假认罪,但非法获取的口供的证明力较强时,是否有必要为维护司法公正而排除该口供。对必要性的判断可从威胁、引诱、欺骗的情节、证据的证明力、排除口供对保障司法公正的实效等方面进行综合考量。
[Abstract]:The mainstream view of Chinese academic and practical circles is that confessions obtained by means of threat, inducement and deception should not be ruled out, but should only be excluded if they meet certain conditions. In our country legislation and theory has not constructed the reasonable illegal confessions exclusion standard, but the scholars advocate the conceive of confession arbitrariness standard, the legitimacy standard, the rationality standard all has the certain flaw situation, the scholar advocates the conceive the confession arbitrariness standard, the legitimacy standard, the rationality standard all has the certain flaw, In order to make the exclusionary standard of illegally obtained oral confession effective, the reliability standard can be regarded as the basic criterion of the exclusion of illegally obtained oral confession and the necessity standard as the supplementary standard. The reliability standard refers to whether obtaining a confession by means of threat, inducement, or deception will lead to a false confession of a criminal suspect. The specific judgment key points of which are to examine the investigators' use of threats and inducements. Whether the psychological compulsion produced by the method of deception is excessive, and when judging whether the psychological compulsion is excessive, the suspect's own situation must be considered. The necessity standard refers to whether it is necessary for investigators to exclude the confession in order to maintain judicial justice when the method of threatening, luring and deceiving is enough to make the suspect make false confession, but the evidence of illegally obtained confession is stronger. The judgment of necessity can be considered comprehensively from the aspects of threat, inducement, deceptive plot, proof of evidence and the effectiveness of excluding confessions to safeguard judicial justice.
【作者单位】：安徽财经大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金青年项目(15CFX028)
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】