论文部分内容阅读
刑事案件事实审理者可依当事人申请或依审判职权启动对犯罪现场的勘验。由于法官借助感官作用直接就犯罪现场之客观性进行考察并形成心证,与现代刑事诉讼证明体系的形成是由一个个口头证言来构建的要求相违反(如交叉询问规则、直接言词原则),因而是一种比较特殊的证据调查方法。为保证此种调查方法的正当性,各国法制均对法庭现场勘验设置严密的程序。以此为借鉴,我国需着重就庭外现场勘验的启动、当事人的参与、法官的勘验记录三个方面进行补充和完善。在法庭实施现场勘验时,法官应当依证据规则或自由裁量对犯罪现场的合法性、真实可靠性和证据适格性进行审查判断。
The actual facts of the criminal case may be filed by the parties concerned or according to the judicial authority to start the examination of the crime scene. Since judges judge the objectivity of the crime scene directly with the help of the sensory function and form the evidential testimony, the formation of modern criminal procedure proof system is contrary to the requirements (such as cross-questioning rules and direct verbal principles) constructed by oral testimony, So it is a special method of evidence investigation. In order to ensure the legitimacy of such investigation methods, the legal procedures in all countries set strict procedures for on-site court proceedings. Taking this as a reference, our country should focus on the on-court court inspection, the participation of the parties, and the inspection record of the judge to supplement and improve. When conducting on-the-spot investigation in court, the judge shall review and judge the legitimacy, authenticity and suitability of the evidence on the crime scene according to rules of evidence or discretion.