The Examination And Adoption Of Death Penalty Cases

The key to the quality of death penalty cases is a correct grasp of the evidence of death penalty cases. The examination of the evidence against the death penalty is the necessary stage and means when identifying the facts of the case. The purpose to study how the examination of the evidence in the case of the death penalty is seeking "irrefutable evidence" and doing "iron case". This thesis was composed of three chapters on how to review evidence and adoption in the case of the death penalty.The first chapter is an outline of the evidence and its review, including the concept, feature, review, contents of evidence,and the standards of evidence review of the evidence admissible. Evidence has the basic features of relevance, legitimacy and authenticity. The contents of evidence review include its sources and the content itself. In judicial practice, the reliability of the evidence source is mainly examined through the following aspects: motive and purpose of the evidence providers,their own situations,the objective environment when they found evidence, the methods of investigation to collect evidence and the evidence and characteristics of the evidence. If the evidence itself can be adopted and accepted is judged from the evidence ability and the evidence power. The standard of some individual evidence examination should emphasizes the follwing aspects: evidnece confirmed to be true, evidence related the the case, the legitimacy and rationality of the evidence. The above-mentioned four points must be present at the same time in order to achieve verified, and fully accepted evidence. In Anglo-American law countries, it is common to adopt the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard when determining whether one is guilty, while in continental law countries, they use"the heart confirmation standard."The second chapter is about the examination and adoption of several kinds of evidence of death penalty in judicial practice. First, for writing and physical evidence, not only should the collection process be examined, the lagality of the procedure and the reasonability of the contents of evidence should aslo be examined in order to see if there is contradiction between the evidence and others and if there is, it is to be found out that whether the contradiction can be excluded. Physical evidence, especailly that are essential, which have some problems or doubts even after complementary examination, can not be adopted. The following aspects about physical evidence examination should be noted: whether the physical evidence has been damaged or changed in the process of collection; whether the physical evidence is faked; whether the physical evidence is meaningful to the clarification of the case; physical evidence should be combined with others in order to prove the truth of the case quickly and accurately; whether there are some evidences which arenot collectd or verified in time and whether there is any possibilty to make up. The following aspects about writing evidence examination should be noted: the relationship between writing evidence and the facts to be proved; the forming process of writing evidence and the contents of writing evidence. Second, when examine the testimony of the witness, many situations should be considered, which include the critical relationships bwtween the witness and the the party involved, the quality of the witness, the source of the witness's testimony, the witness's level of cognitive ability and memory, the objective environment and condition during the witness's perception of the truth, the outer inflence the witness have to face and his expressing ability, the stability of the testimony, the consistency of the evidence, and whether the evidence of the witness and others can prove each other and so on. Third, when examining the statements of victims special attention should be paid that whether the source is legal; whether the victim's statement was his personal perception or his imagination; whether or not the victim's statements are reasonable; review the relationship between the victim and the defendant; the testimony ability and quality of the victim; whether the victim's statements and other evidence are contradicting. Four, the judicial people should should make a comprehensive analysis of the statements of the accused and examine the reasons for its estoppel according to the defendant's volatility confession and allegation. For the complexity of the content of the statement, we must pay attention to the collection and use of other evidence. If there is only the defendant's guilty confession, which contradict with other evidence and the contradictions can not be excluded, then this statement can still not be accepted as evidence for final decision. Furthermore, it is should be noted that the accused can not be foerced self-incrimination and be tempted or intimidated. The statements gained by non-departmental investigation should make the necessary conversion in order to enter the lawsuit procedure. The Statement of the same case can not be used as the sole basis of decision. The facts about other defendants exposed by defendant can be used as testimony. Accomplice's statement can be taken to prove the culprit. Fifth, Fifth, the examination of the identification conclusions should be noted that whether the appraisal people have expert qualification and conditions; whether the material sent to be inspected are full and authetic; whether the appraisal conclusions are in the form of a statutory element; whether the appraisal people and the appraised things should be avoided; careful identification of bone age appaisal conclusions. Sixth, when we examine the scene and check the record, we should make sure whether the examination and the production of their record notes, site maps, and photos are carried out in accordance with the law, whether or not they are objective, true and comprehensive and standardized. Seventh, when checking the audio-visual materials, law enforcement officials and lawyers can not make and use video recording unauthorizedly or in the way of infringing civil rights and privacy. The procuction process and the content of the audio-visual materials and of the production process should be true, and only audio-visual materials in connection with the case can be used as the basis of final decision.Chapter three mainly focus on dealing with the model of the evidence in capital cases which exists doubts. In practice, when the recognized criminal tenable evidence in doubt, from the principles of considering benefit the accused, doubts about the evidence are inadmissible, directly found not guilty. When it can be found sufficient evidence of the establishment of the crime, it had a plot of evidence in doubt, in the last sentence should also leave room and should not be sentenced to death immediately. When a felony has evidence in doubt, misdemeanor has sufficient evidence. It has insufficient evidence to a heavy sentence; it should adopt a lenient sentence. When there is sufficient evidence should be admissible evidence in a light sentence, but not to choose heavy sentence. Evidence in the case of common crime when the evidence in doubt can be dealt with as follows: Firstly, if the majority of criminals at large have not yet brought to justice, that a small number of criminals brought to justice to bear the main responsibility for the flimsy evidence that the primary responsibility is difficult to draw a clear. The rule to the small number of criminals should be left room, should not be sentenced to death immediately. Secondly, in the cases of common in criminal, if half or most of the perpetrators have been brought to justice, the main responsibility can be found for a clean break, the rule to half or most of the perpetrators may be sentenced to death if necessary. Third, in the common intentional homicide cases, the crimes of perpetrators of crimes match, the severity of the hard, we should proceed from reality,and candle that carefully. Fourth, in the cases in which one hire others to kill, wound or organize, command others to kill and wound others, the division of responsibility should follow the following principles: when one command, many kill,and directly cause death, but the murderer is hard to tell, then the one who command is the guiltiest; if the murder is easy to tell, the killer is the guiltiest.