Argument On The Restrictive Application Of Defective Evidence

The use of interrogation（inquiry）strategies exceeds a certain limit,which easily evolves into "illegal methods",which may affect the free confession of the interrogator（inquiries）,which is suspected of obstructing the justice of the process,and making itself objective and true,and has evidence of evidence Confession,its "legitimacy" has flaws,but it does not reach the standard of "illegal evidence exclusion",so the evidence effect is to be determined.This phenomenon is widespread and urgently requires system regulation.Therefore,"defective evidence" can be reasonably positioned as: obtained using methods other than the "Illegal Evidence Exclusion" standard,which is objective and true but needs to limit the applicable evidence.The method of obtaining defective evidence is bound by（illegal）prohibitive provisions,（defective）exclusionary provisions,or（legal）investigative strategies,and has been controversial for a long time.For the admissibility of defective evidence,handling cases Personnel often have greater discretionary power,and whether it is appropriate or not determines the corresponding consequences.Defective evidence exists objectively and requires special attention to the need for its application in legislation and justice.The operational space for conditional application of defective evidence lies in the tension between the "exclusion of illegal evidence" and the "three natures" of criminal evidence.By tracing the historical origin of the formation of defective evidence,we can grasp its characteristics by summarizing its acquisition method and the formation process of evidence,thus establishing the corresponding determination rules.The correct application of defective evidence should follow the principle of proportionality and the principle of value rank.On the basis of clearing the applicable legal and ethical boundaries,for each source of defective evidence,each formulates specific standards for defect inspection and introduces supporting measures for the acceptance.Therefore,while affirming the evidence status of the flawed evidence,the discretion of the case-handler is restricted by restricting the applicable rules,so as to realize the judicial principle based on facts and based on the law.