發(fā)布時間：2018-05-18 03:41

  本文選題：警犬鑒別 + DNA鑒定�。� 參考：《蘭州大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：長期以來,警犬鑒別屢屢用于刑事偵查領(lǐng)域,是偵查人員破案的好幫手,但在實(shí)踐中,警犬鑒別能否作為法庭證據(jù)使用,在法學(xué)界頗具爭議。筆者認(rèn)為,從證據(jù)的合法性、客觀性、科學(xué)性等方面來看,警犬鑒別尚不具備證據(jù)資格,只能作為一種偵查手段使用。DNA鑒定在證據(jù)學(xué)中被稱作“證據(jù)之王”,然而,DNA鑒定在某些情況下并不能百分之百地證實(shí)案件情況,更有甚者得出一個模棱兩可的結(jié)論,因此,司法人員在辦案時需持審慎的態(tài)度對待DNA鑒定的證明力。確定行為人有罪,須全案的證據(jù)達(dá)到“確實(shí)充分”的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn),證據(jù)所證實(shí)的事實(shí)沒有疑點(diǎn),得出唯一性結(jié)論,形成閉合的證據(jù)鏈條,否則只能作出“疑罪從無”的判決。本文以徐輝強(qiáng)奸殺人案為例,著重分析、探討該案的爭議證據(jù)問題—警犬鑒別、DNA鑒定、證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。筆者試圖通過對徐輝案焦點(diǎn)問題的分析,進(jìn)一步反思該案背后的問題:司法人員在實(shí)踐中應(yīng)當(dāng)細(xì)致深入地審查證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力及證明力,各項(xiàng)證據(jù)環(huán)環(huán)相扣地加以印證才能防止錯案的產(chǎn)生;當(dāng)面對證據(jù)不足的疑罪案件時,司法人員應(yīng)當(dāng)秉承“無罪推定”的司法理念,堅持疑罪從無。
[Abstract]:For a long time, police dog identification is often used in the field of criminal investigation, it is a good helper for investigators to solve cases, but in practice, whether police dog identification can be used as court evidence is controversial in the field of law. In the author's opinion, from the aspects of legitimacy, objectivity and scientific nature of evidence, police dog identification is not qualified as evidence, and can only be called "king of evidence" in evidence science by using .DNA identification as a means of investigation. However, in some cases, the case can not be confirmed 100% by DNA identification, and even an ambiguous conclusion can be reached. Therefore, the judicial personnel should treat the proof of DNA identification with caution when handling the case. To determine the perpetrator's guilt, the evidence in the whole case must meet the proof standard of "true sufficiency", and the facts proved by the evidence have no doubt, so that the conclusion of uniqueness is reached, and a closed chain of evidence is formed, otherwise, the judgment of "no doubt crime" can only be made. Taking the case of Xu Hui rape homicide as an example, this paper focuses on the analysis of the controversial evidence in this case-the identification of police dogs and the standard of proof. Through the analysis of the focus of Xu Hui case, the author tries to reflect on the problems behind the case: the judicial personnel should carefully and deeply examine the evidence ability and power of proof in practice. In order to prevent the occurrence of the wrong case, the judicial personnel should uphold the judicial idea of "presumption of innocence" and insist that the suspected crime should never be committed in the face of the suspect case with insufficient evidence.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 孫倩;;無罪推定的外國法溯源與演進(jìn)[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2014年04期

2 李濤;劉鎖英;蘇東峰;;警犬鑒別應(yīng)用為刑事訴訟證據(jù)使用的前景展望[J];中國工作犬業(yè);2012年09期

3 劉偉;;公訴活動中的非理性及其克服 以證據(jù)的審查判斷為切入點(diǎn)[J];中國檢察官;2012年03期

4 宋方明;;“證據(jù)之王”DNA的正確應(yīng)用[J];中國檢察官;2011年14期

5 孫明湘;陳娜;;淺析波普爾的證偽主義——波普爾對“分界問題”與“歸納問題”的解決[J];中南大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2008年01期

，

本文編號：1904233