A, wrongful cases of six reasons
Cause 1: criminal technology is backward
In some of the cases of wrongful deaths, confined to a particular historical period of backwardness of the criminal technology, unable to obtain the relevant evidence from the relevant material information, especially can not make full use of the physical evidence contains the evidence information, can only be obtained through the access to the evidence, the evidence of the victim, the victim of the case, the victim of the case, the victims of the case, the victims of the case, and the victims of the case, and the victims of the case. Evidentiary information, only through the acquisition of confessions to solve the case, to some extent, the backwardness of criminal technology is highly dependent on confession of one of the factors. Such as Inner Mongolia Huge Jil pattern only because of the deceased and Huge Jil figure of the same blood type as the key evidence to determine the guilt of the defendant, contrary to the principle of homogeneity. With the development of science and technology, greatly improving the efficiency of criminal investigation work and scientific, electronic monitoring, DNA identification, and even big data investigation mode of transit, etc. have improved the evidence of the utilization of relevant materials, in order to crack the confession of the centralism to establish the prerequisites.Reason 2: investigative thinking dominates the whole process of criminal proceedings
Investigative thinking is different from the trial thinking, investigative thinking emphasizes the person to the matter, from locking the scope of suspicion, and gradually narrowing the suspicion of the possibility of locking up suspects, the essence of the concept of presumption of innocence, the use of exclusionary rule. And trial thinking emphasizes the evidence for the king, not to the defendant's character, motives and other suspicions as the basis for judging guilt or innocence, the presumption of innocence. Detective mindset may lead to the experience of copying, the formation of a specific situation under the investigation of the misunderstanding, driven by the presumption of guilt, the subsequent evidence collection work is mainly through the collection of evidence to confirm the claim, and the claim has nothing to do or contrary to the evidence material is ignored, and then gradually prove the defendant's criminal behavior. More importantly. This presumption of guilt of the investigation thinking extends, dominate the whole process of criminal proceedings, including in the examination and prosecution stage and the trial stage, are subject to the influence of the investigation thinking, in the subjective cognitive premise that the defendant committed a crime, even if the case does not meet the standard of proof to be made up in the heart, or even referee autonomy for the lack of evidence to find a reason for the problem. In many cases, the case handler (especially the review of the prosecutor, the judge) have noted the existence of evidence to determine the case, are afraid to make a verdict of acquittal easily.Reason 3: torture confession
Analysis of cases of wrongdoing almost always involves an inescapable problem, there is (or can not be excluded) the possibility of torture confession. Criminal confession is the investigative mindset under the means of evidence, is a way to obtain evidence in the case of criminal technology backward. On the one hand, the violation of human rights due to the destruction of the human body is condemned. On the other hand, it may be more important to emphasize that coerced confessions can undermine the authenticity of confessions and lead to wrongful convictions. Particularly noteworthy is that some of the first evidence after the confession of cases due to torture and make the evidence corroborate each other, and even some of the hidden evidence for the review of evidence has brought some difficulties. As Mr. Tian Wenchang said, the use of torture to extort confessions and disguised torture to extort confessions and other methods to illegally obtain the suspect, the accused confession or witness testimony, is the formation of the direct cause of the wrongful conviction, but also with the modern concept of justice and the judicial system to confront a kind of persistent disease.Reason 4: evidence of weak awareness
All cases of wrongdoing have evidence of weak awareness of the problem, the specific manifestation of the polygraph conclusions as evidence, will be the same prison cell of the prison investigation of the ears and eyes of the hearsay evidence as evidence, the lack of the necessary review of the judgment of the evidence of the skills of the evidence of the ability to prove the issue of the power of evidence and the problem of mixing and so on. Evidence is to determine the core of the case, the use of evidence to analyze the judgment is the basic law of adjudication. In the specific use, the ability of judicial officers to comprehensively judge the evidence is insufficient, for the first evidence after the confession, excessive consistency between the evidence, the process of evidence collection and confession changes in the same direction of change, retracted confessions and other issues of insufficient understanding, and, sometimes, in the review of the judgment of the evidence of the defendant's behavior in line with the common sense, common sense, lack of in-depth analysis of the common situation.Reason 5: the public security organs of the judiciary to cooperate, light constraints
Many prosecutors, judges in the process of litigation have found that there is evidence of the case, but failed to put a good gate, but by the concept of presumption of innocence, the criminal justice system, the impact of social opinion, focusing on the mutual cooperation, that the denial of the other organs of the public security and judicial work is inappropriate, and that the public security organs of the public security organs of the public security organs of the public security organs of the public security organs of the public security organs of the public security organs of the public security organs. It is inappropriate to deny the work of other public security and judicial organs, failing to play the vertical structure of criminal proceedings filtering, gate-keeping function.The public security authorities are not able to play the function of filtering and checking in the vertical structure of criminal proceedings.
Reason 6: Exclusion of lawyers
In many cases of wrongdoing, the public security and judicial organs are arbitrarily and brutally excluded from the opinions of lawyers. Even some legal aid lawyers, in cases where there is a possibility of wrongdoing are able to do their best to serve the accused, should uphold the status of neutrality of the adjudicator did not seriously analyze and review the defendant's innocence and the defense of the defendant's defense, listening to the prosecution's views, unable to review the evidence more comprehensively and accurately judged.Second, the wrongful case of the three points of the response
Countermeasures 1: firmly establish the concept of presumption of innocence
Although China's Criminal Procedure Law does not provide for the principle of the presumption of innocence, but on the whole, the concept of the presumption of innocence (without the people's court to find guilty according to law, any person shall be regarded as innocent of all charges, and the court shall not be held responsible. Although the principle of presumption of innocence is not stipulated in China's criminal procedure law, generally speaking, the concept of presumption of innocence (without the people's court found guilty according to law, any person shall be regarded as innocent/not be found guilty) is widely recognized. The concept of renewal and change is the premise and foundation of all institutional construction, and the concept of human rights protection and punishment of crime should be fully and y implemented. Especially in the prosecution and trial, prosecutors and judges should consciously abandon the investigative mindset, prosecutors should abide by the obligation of objectivity and neutrality, the judge should be in the middle of the decision to implement the concept of presumption of innocence as the core of the principle of adjudication of evidence.Countermeasures 2: promote trial-centered reform of the litigation system
First, the independence of the judicial process
The trial-centered reform of the litigation system of the system is the background of the independence of the judicial process, there is no trial independence, how can we talk about the trial as the center. In a particular historical period, the Commission and even the National People's Congress have tried to case supervision, case interference, but the judicial experience inherent requirements of the criminal justice process only in the case of those who can accurately grasp the case of the information and ins and outs of the leadership of the Commission should not be a case of interference.In judicial cases, the Party's leadership should be political leadership, organizational leadership, when it comes to the vindication of wrongful convictions, the Commission should be active, give full play to its coordinating role.
Secondly, the vertical relationship between the public prosecutor and the law
In the vertical relationship of the criminal procedure, the core essence of the trial is to emphasize that the investigation and prosecution are subordinate to the requirements of the trial, and to amend their own standards with reference to the standards of the trial. The progressive relationship between the public prosecution and the law determines that the subsequent decision should be constrained by the previous procedure, the Procuratorate through the review of prosecution activities to review the principle of evidence, supervise the investigation activities in accordance with the lawful way of evidence; the court enjoys the right to final decision, in the context of the post system reform, the judge should be more neutral and impartial based on the evidence of the whole case to determine the case.Third, to deal with the prosecution, defense and trial of the horizontal relationship
Specifically to determine the outcome of the case in the trial, to deal with the prosecution, defense and trial of the horizontal relationship. Criminal adjudication should be neutral, pay attention to play the defense lawyers from different perspectives, in order to play an important role in the prevention of wrongdoing. On the one hand, the referee should be neutral, impartial to listen to the views of the prosecution, but also to carefully study the defense of the defense, to avoid the imbalance between the prosecution and the defense, the trial in form. On the other hand, it is necessary to give full play to the important role of defense lawyers. In view of the problem of energy and position, the judge may not be able to take the interests of the defendant as a criterion as the defense lawyers do, and it is inevitable that part of the information in favor of the defendant will be omitted. Therefore, attaching importance to the opinion of the defense counsel is in essence to support the information for a fair decision.Countermeasures 3: implementation of the principle of evidence
The principle of evidence is due to the criminal proceedings, evidence awareness should be the basic consciousness of the public security and judicial personnel. First, the specific requirements of the elements of evidence should be adhered to. Such as canine identification, polygraph conclusions in the detection of cases with the role of guiding clues, but because it does not meet the formal elements of evidence (in essence, because it does not have the scientific nature of the evidence should be) can not be used as the basis for the case. Secondly, attention should be paid to the issue of evidence capacity. For illegal evidence should be strictly excluded, for defective evidence to point out and require the investigating authorities to make corrections or reasonable explanations, for the prison investigation and other hearsay evidence should not be adopted. Again, should be prudent, rational review and judgment of the dynamic changes in evidence and the role of proof. Finally, to adhere to the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. For cases where reasonable doubt cannot be excluded, the defendant should not be arbitrarily convicted because of various pressures.