Study On The Defective Evidence

Defective Evidence refers to investigation, prosecutions, judicial officers violation of the law, the employment evidence improperly collected of the conviction and sentencing to determine the real situation of the affected cases.How to deal with the defective evidence, has experienced two periods, one of which is "on the handling of criminal cases issues exclusion of illegal evidence" and "Issues concerning handling death penalty cases reviewed to determine rules of evidence"(hereinafter referred to as "illegal evidence exclusion " " rules of evidence in death penalty cases, " the two together, " two " rules of evidence " ")before the introduction,scholars have raised a positive theory, negative theory, eclectic theory and transformation theory; two " rules of evidence " introduction, discussion on various views to come to an end, lawmakers for the defective evidence tends to the positive attitude, began to recognize and absorb the defective evidence.The introduction of the defective evidence system is to regulate and reduce the defective evidence, if the standard is not defective evidence scientifically, may lead to the development of the defective evidence more,hinder the investigation organ forensics behavior standard, is not conducive to the realization of judicial correction function. How to reduce the flaw evidence? This standard requires reasonable definition of defects, improve the system of obtaining evidence, improve investigation ability, improve the review procedures. The legal document clearly pointed out, facing the defective evidence of the situation, need reasonable explanation and correction. But how to explain and supplement, due to the subjective and objective reasons, causes a lot of problems. The root of the problem lies in the judicial organ heavy entity light procedure, legislative understanding deviation, the means of abuse, where the evidence to be corrected or explained, investigators or unwilling to explain correction, rigid thinking, at the same time, prosecutors and judges lack the pursuit of efficient motivation; in fact, the existence of judicial status quo, serious lack of the defective evidence contradiction between soil and the fight against crime and the legal procedure caused by the defective evidence facing the embarrassment. Faced with this situation, the judicial personnel will inevitably be difficult to identify the defective evidence, the lack of procedure so as not to be corrected or explained, correction range is narrow, the object is not clear, can not be effectively corrected and corrected many superficial interpretation in practice, can not eliminate the problem of reasonable doubt. The establishment of defective evidence system in our country the defective evidence by correction or to make a reasonable explanation for the final evidence into legal admissibility. At the same time, we should also reflect on the risk for "blemish evidence" may cause the system, discuss how to regulate and reduce the risk of defective evidence, strengthen the prevention of the defective evidence system.