论审前重复供述的可采性

发布时间：2018-06-22 11:54

本文选题：审理前 + 重复供述　；参考：《证据科学》2013年04期

【摘要】：由于审前重复供述的可采性直接关涉非法证据排除规则能否得到有效实施,因而,必须对审前重复供述的可采性做出规范。域外国家和地区有关判例在判断重复供述可采性时均是分析前次的非法取证行为是否对重复供述产生影响。此种分析严格来说不是"毒树之果"理论的运用,而是"非法讯问行为持续影响效力"的分析方法。我国应采用"非法取证行为持续影响效力"的分析方法,以便能在现行的法律框架内为法院排除重复供述提供法律依据。采用此种分析方法须综合考量个案中的具体因素。在我国,排除重复供述还面临着前次非法供述难以被排除以及法官自由裁量权过大两方面的困境,对此应进一步构建和完善相关制度。
[Abstract]:Since the admissibility of repeated statements before trial is directly related to the effective implementation of the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence, it is necessary to regulate the admissibility of repeated confessions before trial. In judging the admissibility of repeated confessions, the relevant jurisprudence of foreign countries and regions is to analyze whether the previous illegal evidence collection behavior has an impact on the repeated confessions. Strictly speaking, this analysis is not the application of the theory of "the fruit of poison tree", but the analysis method of "continuous influence of illegal interrogation". In order to provide legal basis for the court to exclude repeated statements, China should adopt the analysis method of "continuous effect of illegal evidence taking" in order to provide a legal basis for the court to exclude repeated statements within the existing legal framework. The use of this analytical method requires a comprehensive consideration of the specific factors in the case. In China, the exclusion of repeated confessions is also facing the difficulties of the previous illegal confessions are difficult to be excluded and the judges' discretion is too large, so we should further construct and improve the relevant system.
【作者单位】：西南政法大学;河南省洛阳市河南科技大学法学院;
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】