摘要
刑事证明是证成案件事实而非发现案件事实的活动,表现为证据到裁判的过程,这决定刑事证明必须与裁判要求相关联,然而在"乌托邦"式的证明标准影响下,我国当前未能就"不认罪型"案件的证明特征、证明路径和裁判结果等问题提供明晰的答案,刑事证明似乎成为"不足为外人道"的暗箱操作。取径于最佳解释推理模型,以"接受"为推理起点,控辩双方基于已有的言词证据和实物证据生成解释推理版本,裁判方在可废止性规则指引下对此进行选择、评估,最终确定最优域值解释推理版本作为裁判结果,并对法官作出裁判的要求进行定义,以实现案件事实在最大可能的理论陈述中进行确证和刑事判决证成的公开化。
Criminal proof is an activity to prove the facts of a case,not to discover the facts of a case.It is a process from evidence to judgment,which determines that criminal proof must be related to the requirements of the judgment.However,under the influence of the“Utopian”proof standard,at present,China is unable to provide a clear answer to the problems of the character of proof,the path of proof and the result of judgment in“non-guilty”cases.Based on the best inference to the explanation model,taking“acceptance”as the starting point,the two sides of the prosecution and defense produce the explanation version based on the existing verbal evidence and physical evidence,guided by the rule of repeatability,the adjudicators select,evaluate,and determine the interpretation version of the optimal threshold,and define the requirements for ajudge to make a decision in order to make the facts of the case corroborated in the most possible theoretical statement and the criminal judgment corroborated publicly.
出处
《厦门大学法律评论》
2020年第1期92-111,共20页
Xiamen University Law Review
关键词
不认罪型
证明模式
最佳解释推理
印证证明模式
“Non-Confession”Criminal Case
Mode of Criminal Proof
Optimal Model of Explanatory Reasoning
Verification of Corroboration
