On The Existing Problems And Perfection Of "Conviction" And "Conviction" In Trial

In recent years,criminal cases committed by mental patients have received extensive attention from the general public.The handling of such cases involves forensic psychiatric identification and the determination of criminal liability capabilities.The public often doubts the accuracy and authenticity of expert opinions.In such cases,there are doubts and disputes about the subject,process and result of the determination of the criminal responsibility of the perpetrator.On the one hand,judicial psychiatric expert opinions are the basis for judicial organs to handle such cases,and have an important impact on the judgment of cases.The expert opinions are highly professional,subjective,and closed,and the expert results often cause disputes;the prosecution and defense have unbalanced participation rights,the expert opinions are not fully cross-examined in court,and the contents of the expert documents are not comprehensive.It is difficult for judges to authenticate the opinions and conclusions of the expert opinion and make independent judgments during the trial.On the other hand,the determination of the criminal responsibility of mental patients is the core and key to handling such cases.At present,in the determination of criminal responsibility in China,there are improper positioning of the determination subject,the content of the determination is complex and abstract,and the hybrid standard of combining biology and psychology has not been found.Accurate application and other issues;the determination of criminal responsibility capacity should be based on legal requirements and medical requirements as supplementary.However,the judge’s lack of certification ability in the process of criminal responsibility determination and insufficient play a leading role will not only affect the determination of criminal responsibility capacity.The authority and accuracy cause social controversy and are not conducive to the realization of judicial justice.Therefore,from the dual perspectives of theory and judicial practice,this article analyzes the scope of forensic psychiatric appraisal,the initiation of appraisal,the content of the appraisal opinion,and the way the judges authenticated the appraisal opinion in the trial based on the case of mental illness crimes in practice;In the comparative law,the classification,standards,the relationship and path of identification and control ability of mental patient’s criminal responsibility ability are comprehensively discussed,and the identification standard,content and principle of mental patient’s criminal responsibility ability in our country are further analyzed.It is clear that "conviction" is the basis of "conviction",and "conviction" is the key to case judgment.It is further proposed that the judicial power of judges should be the mainstay in the trial of such cases,and the expert opinions should be supplemented.From three perspectives: forensic psychiatric identification,determination of criminal responsibility ability,and judge’s judgment ability,the path and method to solve the problem are found.Strengthen the system guarantee of forensic psychiatric identification by refining the identification start conditions,establishing the mechanism for the identification person to testify in court and assuming responsibility,establish the procedures for pre-trial disclosure of identification opinions,and standardize identification documents;and through seeking a reasonable identification path,correct understanding of identification subjects,Identify the content and improve the process of identifying the criminal responsibility of mental patients in our country;by clarifying the authentication rules of the appraisal opinion,introducing expert jurors and expert assistants,adding theoretical evidence on legal issues in the judgment,and further strengthening the judge’s authentication and adjudication ability.