The Categorization And Application Of Criminal Inspection Report

Inspection system has been established as a legal way to solve the criminal specialized problem in addition to judicial expertise.However,the current law does not specify the evidence categorization.There are three kinds of theories,including nonjudicial expertise opinion,judicial expertise opinion and independent evidence.The ambiguity leads to the plight of the judicial practice.As the unified management of judicial expertise tends to be scientific and standardized,it is necessary to clarify the boundary between inspection report and judicial appraisal opinion,and then establish the categorization and the rule application.After defining the concept and distinguishing criteria,the study through the empirical analysis,summed up that report name and special issues involved are diverse and complex,the categorization is not unified,the cross-examination focuses on the disputes of categorization and legal qualification,report reliability is differentiated,the judge standard is not unified.According to the summary of the characteristics of practice operation,this study discusses the categorization,and explores the feasible path of effective crossexamination and admissibility.Comparing inspection report with the relevant legal evidence types,it is not suitable to classify it into the documentary evidence because of its verbal attributes and the lack of official documentary right relief.Because there are substantial differences with judicial expertise opinions in the qualification requirements of people with specialized knowledge,the responsibility and of opinions,the reliability of methods,it is not appropriate to confuse it with appraisal opinions,as well as the closure of judicial appraisal qualification of appraisal opinions is irreversible.It is not reasonable to classify it as witness testimony or inquisition records,which may lead to the confusion of the existing categories of evidence.Therefore,it is difficult to classify it as one of the existing types of legal evidence,and should be considered an independent evidence.The establishment of independent evidence positioning of inspection report conforms to the concept of evidence law in China.While setting necessary legal conditions and admission qualifications for the transformation of evidence into a final case,more materials recording case information should be included in the scope of evidence as far as possible.At the same time,the independent evidence category is helpful to further define the boundary between the inspection report and judicial appraisal opinion and promotes the development of both.Considering the problems of judicial practice,the value of efficiency and justice,it makes sense to establish the clear rules of categorization and application of inspection report.The independent evidence orientation of inspection report can be constructed by adding new types of evidence or changing the legal evidence from closed to open.What’s more,the study discusses that it is not suitable to put inspection report and expert advisory opinion into the same category from the perspective of the litigation function and orientation.Opinions that expert advisory express concerning the matter of the criminal specialized problem,besides giving opinions on cross-examination should still belongs to expert advisory opinion,which should not be considered that they can express their opinions on specialized issues alone.The opinions of the expert advisory are only the opinions of cross-examination,but not the basis for conviction,and the two should not be confused.The path of adding new types of evidence is more precise,with stronger normative guidance,and also maintains the concept of legal categories of evidence,while the transformation of legal evidence from closed to open is more long-term.Both paths have their advantages and disadvantages.However,no matter what path is adopted,the establishment of independent evidence category is not enough to solve the problems in practice,and further refinement of supporting legal provisions is still needed.In order to resolve difficulties in judicial practice,including its complexity,unified standard of qualification and reliability differentiation,it is necessary to standardize the procedures of the judicial application through structing the necessity review of inspection report,substantial judgment standard,procedure principles conducive to litigation.To strengthen and perfect the rules of full cross-examination,comprehensive evidence verification and full reasoning promotes the essentialism of court hearing.These suggestions not only meet the needs of judicial practice,but also enable the legal system to achieve logical self-consistency.