The change of the concept of handling cases in public prosecution
1, establish a correct law enforcement concept. The appearance of unjust, false and misjudged cases is related to unreasonable criminal justice concepts. The urgency of "the murder case must be solved", the indignation of "killing for life" and the inertia of presumption of guilt make rigorous thinking replace the impulse to investigate and ignore suspicious cases that should have been discovered. What followed was to find evidence for crimes instead of suspects, which reversed the normal judicial logic and made the whole judicial process subjective and one-sided. Some prosecutors blindly emphasize the integration of investigation and control, pay more attention to the cooperation of investigators than supervision, tolerate and correct irregular investigation behaviors, and review prosecution activities to promote investigation, which leads to the decline of the filtering function of review and control in public prosecution. In order to meet the needs of the trial-centered litigation system reform, the public prosecution department should actively change the concept of handling cases, from focusing on combating protection to punishing crimes and safeguarding human rights, from focusing on substantive value to focusing on substantive value and procedural value, from investigating facts to proving facts, from relying on verbal evidence to focusing on objective evidence, and from focusing on probative natural evidence to focusing on the admissibility of social evidence. The public prosecutor should deeply realize that the current public prosecution work is not only a conviction public prosecution, but also a sentencing public prosecution and a procedural public prosecution. Public prosecutors should consciously adhere to an objective and fair position, restrain excessive impulse to investigate cases, examine cases in strict accordance with the law, and constantly improve the quality of handling cases.
2. Establish a rational view of evidence. Justice is an activity full of anxiety, and judicial personnel seem to live forever in a society with insufficient evidence and laws. In case handling, what kind of evidence view the judicial personnel hold has a great influence on the collection and application of evidence, and then on the determination of facts. To establish a rational view of evidence, we must cultivate a rational spirit of doubt, listen to the voice of doubt more, and get our own judgment after eliminating all doubts with evidence. Second, we should add a question mark to the verbal evidence, so that a sentence can be finalized, there will be no false beginning, untrue and don't bother to push it again. Even physical evidence should not be over-trusted, because it may be forged, altered and carry natural distortion information. Third, we should attach great importance to the evidence of innocence. For example, in the "Zhang rape case", the DNA detected from the victim's fingernails ruled out the possibility of leaving two copies, but the case handlers did not pay attention to it, but "purified" the evidence system of the original trial by not excluding the contact of the deceased with others before his death. Fourth, illegal evidence should be prevented from entering the evidence system. Once the confession obtained by torture enters the evidence system, the determination of the facts of the case is devastating. Behind many unjust cases, you can almost see the shadow of illegal evidence. Fifth, it should be clear that relevance is the premise of relying on evidence to identify the facts of a case, and the facts as evidence content must have substantial proof significance for the facts to be proved in the case. In judicial practice, character evidence is irrelevant to the facts to be proved and cannot be used as the basis for deciding a case. The polygraph results and the smell of police dogs only provide the investigation direction of the case and cannot be used as litigation evidence. Sixth, we should explain scientifically and use objective evidence to avoid insufficient or excessive explanation. For example, the DNA information of the defendant was detected from the genitals of the deceased. This alone can only prove that the two had sexual contact, but it can't prove that the defendant committed murder. Seventh, we should be good at finding and analyzing contradictions between evidences. It is normal for the case file materials to have a certain degree and scope of contradictions. If the materials are highly consistent, or the overlap between evidences gradually forms, it should attract our attention. Prosecutors should be good at analyzing the differences of materials and making choices. He can neither ignore the fundamental contradiction and rashly identify the facts of the case, nor dare to identify the facts of the crime because of some non-fundamental contradictions.
3. Pay attention to the opinions of defense lawyers. Without the lawyer system, there can be no real rule of law. Criminal defense system is a basic system to protect state rights, especially personal rights, from illegal infringement by public power and to protect innocent people from criminal investigation. The public prosecutor should establish the concept of dialectical thinking and realize that public prosecution and defense are antagonistic, complementary, unified and mutually reinforcing. The fierce confrontation and attack and defense between the prosecution and the defense have greatly stimulated and promoted both sides. Both the prosecution and the defense belong to the same legal subject, and their ultimate goal is the same, which is to find out the facts of the case and realize fairness and justice. We should establish a harmonious relationship between prosecution and law that is both relative and compatible, competitive and supportive. The public prosecutor should restrain the excessive impulse to investigate crimes and uphold the objective and fair position. He should not only position himself as the role of convicting and punishing criminal suspects, but also adhere to the objective and neutral position, perform all his duties fairly, pay full attention to the facts and circumstances that are beneficial or unfavorable to the accused, and not only prosecute crimes, but also safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the accused. Prosecutors should not regard defense lawyers as opponents in court or enemies in the process of litigation. In the process of "restoring" and "reproducing" the facts of the case with evidence, actively listening to the opinions of defense lawyers is conducive to finding the problems in the case as soon as possible, making up for the lack of self-examination of the case, and ensuring the accuracy of the facts and the appropriate application of the law.
If you can give detailed information, you can give a more detailed answer.