Lawyer, this statement is different from what I said, how to do?

Criminal defense lawyers and parties in the verification of statements, may have encountered such a scenario:

lawyer, I did not say such a thing ah!

Lawyer, I said it is not the meaning of this ah!

lawyer, I said I don't know, how to write the transcript I know ah!

In the face of such questions, defense lawyers should start from what aspects, check the authenticity of the transcript?

First, ask the parties in the interrogation process, the investigating authorities whether there is the illegal behavior of torture confession

According to "Criminal Procedure Law" Article 56 of the provisions of the use of torture to force confessions and other illegal methods of collection of criminal suspects, defendants confession, shall be excluded.

What is torture and other illegal methods? According to the Interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Law, it refers to the use of physical torture or disguised physical torture (such as: freezing, starvation, sun, baking, fatigue interrogation, etc.), forcing the defendant to make a confession against his will.

In the daily defense work, I will hear the parties mentioned, the investigators there are on their loud scolding, or even pushing, hitting, kicking behavior. Not all of these inappropriate behavior can be called "torture confession".

Only to achieve the suspect in the physical or mental suffering severe pain or suffering behavior, forced confession can be excluded as illegal evidence. Defense lawyers should initiate the exclusion process if they find that the evidence in the case may be illegal.

For not reaching the degree of torture to force confessions, we need to explain to the parties to the legal recognition of the standard, told him again encountered the uncivilized behavior of the investigators, should remind each other to pay attention to their own attitudes, and at the end of the interrogation carefully check the transcripts. If there is a record and confession does not match the situation, the right to modify.

Second, the lawyer can copy the interrogation audio and video, corroborate the authenticity of the party's confession, legitimacy

(a) audio and video recordings and interrogation transcripts are inconsistent, how to do?

In practice, the content of the transcript and audio-visual inconsistency of many cases, but this does not mean that, once the inconsistency of the claim of illegal evidence exclusion, the audio-visual and transcript are excluded, is tantamount to the child and the bath water together.

According to the "Supreme People's Court on the comprehensive promotion of trial-centered reform of the criminal procedure system of the implementation of the opinion" Article 24, the court of the legitimacy of the investigation of the evidence cell phone, should pay attention to the interrogation process audio-visual review. The content of the interrogation transcripts and the interrogation video recording of substantive differences, to the interrogation video recording shall prevail.

According to the above legal basis, the substance of the same, only individual parts of the content is inconsistent, does not affect the authenticity of the confession; but if the video recording reflects the existence of transcripts from the record, the text does not match the substantive differences, then the legitimacy of the transcripts should be challenged, and even be excluded.

(ii) should be audio-video recording and did not record, the collection of confession is legal?

According to the "public security organs interrogation of criminal suspects audio-visual work regulations" and "People's Procuratorate interrogation of suspects of job-related crimes throughout the implementation of synchronous audio-visual recording provisions", should be audio-visual recording of cases:

(a) may be sentenced to life imprisonment, the death penalty in the case;

(b) causing serious injury, death of a serious endangerment of the public **** security crimes, serious violations of the personal rights of citizens crime cases;

(iii) triad nature organization crime cases, including organizing and leading triad nature organizations, entering and developing triad organizations, harboring and conniving at triad nature organizations and other crimes;

(iv) serious drug crime cases, including smuggling, trafficking, transporting and manufacturing of drugs, illegally possessing a large amount of drugs, harboring criminals smuggling, trafficking, transporting and manufacturing of drugs Serious cases of smuggling, illegal trade in manufactured drugs in large quantities;

(v) Other cases of intentional crimes, which may be sentenced to more than ten years of imprisonment;

(vi) Cases of crimes in office.

For the legal provisions should be audio-video recording of the case, the interrogation is required to synchronize the whole process, to maintain the integrity of the interrogation, shall not be selective recording, editing, deletion. In the case of incomplete audio and video recordings of interrogation, cannot rule out the possibility that the interrogation of suspects in the process of coerced confessions.

According to the "Supreme People's Court on the comprehensive promotion of trial-centered reform of the criminal procedure system of the implementation of the views of Article 24, for the legal provisions of the interrogation process should be audio-visual recording of the case, the public prosecutor did not provide audio-visual recording of the interrogation, or audio-visual recording of the interrogation of the existence of selective recording, editing, deletion of the situation, the existing evidence can not be ruled out to unlawful methods of collection of evidence, the confession should be ruled out. Confessions should be excluded.

It can be seen that should be recorded but not recorded statements are not excluded, only in the "can not rule out the collection of evidence by unlawful means" can be excluded.

Third, the conclusion

for the confession, the lawyer's advice to the parties only one, please check their own records.

Previously, there are several cases of parties to the authenticity of their own records have questioned, but when I found through the audio-visual verification, he signed the transcripts while talking to the case officer, while signing, the investigator pointed out where he signed where, for the content of the transcripts and did not carefully check, which lost an important opportunity to defend their rights.