论文部分内容阅读
证明科学是对对事实进行处理的一种科学,它包含了各种跨学科的知识含量,并且对法官和律师而言具有实证的操作意义。但自然科学实验室与法庭所面临不同条件,相应地司法证明中的真相亦有别于自然科学领域的真相。证明科学首先要面对的是自由证明原则问题,现代证据科学认为事实发现的基础在于观察和理性,只要来源于观察所得并符合理性定律即为符合条件的证据。作为证据法的基石,可采性规则侧重于何种证据能够进入到法庭的视野中作为裁判案件的依据,科学化司法证明中对可采性与相关性间的关系提出了新见解——具有可采性的证据未必具有相关性。
Proving that science is a science that deals with facts is a science that embraces a variety of interdisciplinary knowledge and has empirical operational implications for judges and lawyers. However, the different conditions that natural science laboratories and tribunals face, and correspondingly the truth in judicial evidence, are also different from the truth in the field of natural science. Prove that science must first face the issue of the principle of proof of freedom, modern evidence science believes that the basis for the discovery of facts lies in observation and reason, as long as it comes from the observation and in accordance with the law of reason is eligible evidence. As the cornerstone of the law of evidence, admissibility rules focus on what kind of evidence can enter the court’s perspective as the basis for judgments, scientific jurisprudence provides a new view of the relationship between admissibility and relevance - with Evidence of admissibility may not be relevant.