Analysis On Cases About Exclusionary Rules Of Nonviolent Access To Verbal Evidence

The establishment of the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence in China is of great significance to the realization of procedural justice,substantive justice and human rights protection in judicial practice.This is a major progress in China’s criminal procedure legislation.Further improving the exclusionary rules of illegal evidence will not only enrich the theoretical research of the exclusionary rules of illegal evidence,but also help to solve the problems that the exclusionary rules of illegal evidence are difficult to apply in judicial practice,so as to achieve better operational results in judicial practice.The exclusionary rule of illegal evidence clearly prohibits the use of threats,inducements,deception and other illegal methods to obtain verbal evidence,but does not specify whether to exclude the evidence obtained by the above methods,nor whether the repeated confession obtained by the above methods is admissible.By searching the relevant judicial documents,it can be found that due to the unclear relevant provisions,there are great disputes on the admissibility of verbal evidence and repeated confession obtained by threat or inducement in judicial practice.There are a large number of cases in which the defendant or defender applied for the exclusion of illegal evidence on the grounds that the case handling unit used threats or inducements to obtain confessions,but it is rare for the defense opinions to be adopted by the trial court.Based on the relevant legal provisions,based on the legislative purpose of criminal procedure and the consideration of judicial practice,this paper analyzes the relevant typical judicial cases.Verbal evidence and repeated confessions obtained by threats,inducements and other methods should not be forcibly excluded,but should be analyzed in a specific way.According to the actual situation of the case,a comprehensive consideration should be given to the basic situation of the defendant,the illegal degree of evidence collection,the violation of social morality and the good customs of public prosecution and other factors to decide whether to exclude verbal evidence and repeated confessions obtained by the above methods.In order to make the rules of illegal verbal evidence play a greater role in judicial practice,it is suggested to further improve the standard of identification of illegal verbal evidence,the exclusionary procedure of illegal verbal evidence,and the synchronous recording and recording system of interrogation.At the same time,the case handling units,especially the investigation organs,should firmly establish the judicial concept of "presumption of innocence",actively adapt to the challenges brought by the investigation in the new era,and no longer risk procedural violations to solve cases.It is hoped that the analysis of typical cases can provide guidance for handling similar cases in judicial practice in the future.