刑事错案论文：论刑事案件证明标准的适用【中文摘要】刑事案件证明标准是刑事诉讼中定罪量刑活动的核心,其能否正确得到适用攸关刑事案件审判的质量。近年来,发生的一系列冤假错案,其主要的原因就在于刑事诉讼中司法人员对于我国刑事案件证明标准“案件事实清楚、证据确实、充分”的理解和认识出现了偏差。由于该规定过于抽象、缺乏可操作性,司法实践并未形成统一的适用标准,致使司法审判中出现诸多的问题。如本案中仅有被告人的口供,在缺乏证明被告人有罪实物证据的情况下,就被法院认定“案件事实清楚、证据确实、充分”而据以有罪的处罚。这种严重曲解刑事证明标准而作出的不公正裁判,值得我们反思我国刑事案件证明标准适用的现状。本文以案例分析的形式来分析论证我国刑事案件证明标准的适用。即探究冤假错案的发生与刑事案件证明标准的适用不当有着天然的联系的。首先,通过分析介绍“赵作海案”的案情,来引出我国刑事诉讼证明标准存在的问题。此部分主要论证了刑事案件定罪证明标准存在的问题,即我国法律并没有明确规定刑事案件定罪的证明标准,“案件事实清楚、证据确实、充分”的刑事证明标准,是从相关法律规定中总结出来的。而且司法实践中对于该证明标准的理解和适用也是莫衷一是。对于刑事证据是否达到确实充分,据以认定案件事实清楚的证据取得是否符合法定的程序,由此给法官形成的内心确信程度等问题的考量,司法人员也是因人而异。此外,分析论证了我国“留有余地判死缓”刑事政策在赵作海案中被司法人员严重误解。其次,根据刑事案件证明标准的适用引申出了死刑案件与非死刑案件证明标准的辨析,依次论述了我国死刑案件与非死刑案件在证明标准中的的现状与不足,并在此基础上论证了两者的联系与区别。此外,分析了我国刑事案件定罪与量刑证明标准一体化存在的不足以及两者分离的必要性。最后,分析了非法证据排除在我国刑事案件证明标准中存在的意义。【英文摘要】Standardofproofincriminalcasesistheconvictionandsentencingofcriminalactivitiesinthecoreofitsabilitytogetthecorrectapplicationofthequalityofthecriminaltrialanddeath.Inrecentyears,aseriesofenemymiscarriageoccurred,themainreasonisthatthejudiciaryincriminalproceedings,thestandardofproofforcriminalcasesinChina,“factsofthecaseclear,theevidenceisreliableandsufficient”understandingandknowledgehasgonewrong.Astheprovisionsaretooabstract,thelackofmaneuverability,theformationofaunifiedjudicialpracticedoesnotapplytostandard,resultingintheemergenceofanumberofjusticeissues.Asinthepresent,onlythedefendant’sconfession,intheabsenceofphysicalevidencetoproveguiltoftheaccused’scase,thecourtheldthatthe“factsofthecaseclear,theevidenceisreliableandsufficient,”accordingtotheguiltypunished.Thisseriousdistortionofthecriminalstandardofproofmadeunjustjudge,weshouldreflectonourstandardofproofapplicableincriminalcasesthestatusquo.Inthispaper,theformofcasestudiestoanalyzetheargumentofChina’sstandardofproofapplicableincriminalcases.Thatexploretheenemyandtheoccurrenceoferroneousstandardofproofapplicableincriminalcasesthereisanaturallinkimproper.First,byanalyzingtheintroduction,“ZhaoZuohaicase,”thefactsofthecasetoleadtoChina’scriminalstandardofproofproblems.Thispartofthemainargumentofthestandardofproofincriminalcases,theproblemsconvictionthatourlawdoesnotclearlydefinedstandardofproofincriminalcases,convictions,“factsofthecaseclear,theevidenceisreliableandsufficient,”thecriminalstandardofproofissummarizedfromtherelevantlegalprovisionsout.Andjudicialpractice,thestandardofprooffortheinterpretationandapplicationisnoagreement.Whetherforcriminalevidenceisample,accordingtothefactsofthecasemadeclearevidenceofcompliancewithstatutoryprocedures,whichformtheheartsuretojudgetheextentof...
