Research On The Improvement Of The Rule Of Exclusion Of Repeated Confessions

The rule of excluding repetitive confessions is one of the procedural sanctions against illegal evidence-taking and is "a hidden reef under the illegal evidence exclusion system".Since the exclusion of illegal evidence entered practice in China in 2010,the issue of whether to exclude repetitive confessions has also entered practice.2017 "Two Evidence Regulations" formally established the exclusion of repetitive confessions,creating a universal law that excludes all in principle and no exceptions."However,because the system has just been established,the legislative content is lacking,the text is debatable,and there are still many imperfections in the construction of the system that need to be resolved.The rule of excluding repetitive confessions should be applied to the extent possible,to examine whether they are voluntary and thus admissible,so the criteria for determining the rule of excluding repetitive confessions should be clarified first,to solve the problem of the narrow scope of previous confessions,the incomplete consideration of exceptions,and the problem of whether subsequent confessions and previous confessions must be the same.The question of whether subsequent statements must be identical to previous statements should be addressed.In the process of examining the admissibility of duplicate confessions,the lack of clear procedural norms and uniform standards for their application has led to a departure from the principle of exclusion and the exception of non-exclusion.Not strictly in accordance with the principles and exceptions model analysis of the exclusion or non-exclusion of repeated confessions,many cases are still using the judge’s evidence to deal with repeated confessions or even not reasoned.Identifying the specific circumstances in which each system applies,we believe that the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine is different from repeated confessions in many aspects,including the circumstances and content of application.In dealing with the issue of repeated confessions,it should not be presumed that subsequent confessions have a causal relationship with previous illegal acts,nor should it be presumed that the occurrence of exceptional circumstances and the causal relationship between the voluntariness of the confession is guaranteed.At the same time,China can draw on the jurisprudence of the common law system,the application of guiding cases on the exclusion of repetitive confessions rule to refine the formation of China’s unique and universal rules for the exclusion of repetitive confessions.Clarify the boundaries of the exclusionary rule of repeated confessions,as far as possible to avoid subsequent confessions do not belong to repeat confessions and escape from the rules review system dilemma;to avoid exceptions due to the lack of clarity and specificity,should have been a small number of exceptions used to become a "pocket",as long as the existence of exceptions mentioned in the case of all loaded.Once again,the review principle of excluding repeated confessions is clear,and the review process is refined,strictly in accordance with the "principles plus exceptions" model review process,in order to determine the legality of previous confessions,the legality of repeated confessions and the existence of exceptions,relying on process evidence first to determine the evidentiary capacity of the confession,not just the results of the evidence to judge The voluntary nature of the confession,only the suspect,the defendant’s free will to make the confession can be admitted,in line with the substantive lawful.And according to the characteristics of China’s criminal proceedings put forward the further development and vision of the rule of excluding repeated confessions.