非法自白应否在刑事诉讼中作为证据使用——英美非法证据排除规则的简要历史

当前位置: 首页》《中国法学》目录与摘要

日期:19-06-19 来源: 作者:admin

摘要(Abstract)：

在刑事司法领域,没有什么题目比证据规则更为重要,它通常反映着某一社会的思想意识和价值观念。一千年以前,在普通法系的发源地英国和民法法系的起源地西欧,占统治地位的价值乃是对万能的、无所不知的神的宗教信仰。

关键词(KeyWords)：

基金项目(Foundation):

作者(Author): 弗洛伊德·菲尼,郭志媛

Email:

参考文献(References)：

①See, e. g. , Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment, Report( Illinois, 2002) .
①John W.Strong,MCCORMICK ON EVIDENCE 422(5th ed. 1999) .
②William Blackstone,COMMENTARIES ON THE LAWS OF ENGLAND 320( 1769)"the trial by rack is utterly unknown to the lawof England";Jamnes Stephen, A HISTORY OF THE CRIMINAL LAW OF ENGLAND 222(1883).
③Leonard Levy, ORIGINS OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT:THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF - INCRIMINATION 33 - 34( 1968). JohnW.Wigmore,EVIDENCE IN TRIALS AT COMMON LAW294(J.Mc Naughton rev. 1961)finds torture to be somewhat more rom-mon,but his sources seem to the inferior to those of Professor Levy. See generally R. H. Helrnholz, "Origins of the PrivilegeAgainst Self-Incrirnination: The Role of the European Ius Commune, "65 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 962( 1990) .
④Leonard Levy,ORIGINS OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT:THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION 43(1968) .
①由于有时不允许被告人宣誓作证,一些权威人士认为,自白更多地是作为有罪答辩来使用,而不是作为证据使用。
②Leonard Levy, ORIGINS OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT:THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION 326 - 328. (1968) .
③Rudd's Case, Leadch Cr.C. 115,118,168 Eng. Rep. 160,161(1775).
④Warickshall' s Case, Leach Cr. C. 263,263-264, Eng. Rep. 234,234-235 (K. B. 1783).
⑤抗议称该宣誓程序违背了权利大宪章,后者是公元1215年由英王约翰颁布的一部重要宪章。
①Leonard Levy,ORIGINS OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT: THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION 281(1968).
② 更符合字面含义的翻译为“没有人愿意背叛他自己”。
③同①,第326页。
④"National Investigation of "Third Degree'Methods, "AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CRIMINAK LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY JOURNAL, No.2( July) , at 108(1910- 1911).
⑤"The 'Third Degree'and the Position of the Trial Judge in Illinois-," ILLINOI LAW REVIEW 303(1912 - 1913); Zechariah Chafee, Jr. , Walter Pollak, & Carl Stem, THE THIRD DEGREE: REORT TO THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON LAW OBSERVANCE AND ENFORCEMENT(1931)(Wickersham Commission Report No. 11,Report on Lawlessnes in Law Enforcement) ,38 -45.
①National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, REPORT ON LAWLESSNESS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT (1931)(Report No. 11); REPORT ON PROSECUTION (1931) (Report No. 4); Ernest Hopkins, OUR LAWLESS POLICE (New York:Viking Press, 1931).
②Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U. S. 278( 1936).
③Chambers v. Florida, 309 U . S. 227( 1940) .
④Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 5 .
⑤Mc Nabbv.United States,318 U.S.332(1943) ; James Hogan and Joseph Snee,"The McNabb - Mallory Rule:Its Rise,Rationaleand Rescue ,"47 GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL 1(1958).
①Miranda v. Arizona,384 U.S.436( 1966) .
②See Wayne R. LaFave Jerold H. Israel & Nancy J. King, CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 332 - 373(St. Paul: West,3d ed. ,2000).
③WORKS OF JEREMY BENTHAM 445(J. Bowring,ed. 1962) .
④Edward J. Imwinkelrieed, THE NEW WIGMORE:A TREATISE ON EVIDENCE: EVIDENTIARY PRIVILEGES 117(2002).
⑤John H.Wigmore,EVIDENCE IN TRIALS AT COMMON LAW 310- 318(J.Mc Naughton rev. ,1961).
①Mallory v.United States,354 U.S.449(1957) .
②Escobedo v. Illinois,378 U.8.478(1964) .
③See, e. g. , Fred Graham, THE SELF - INFLICTED WOUND( New York: Macmillan, 1970) .
④Office of Legal Policy, Report to the Attorney General on the Law of Pretrial Interrogation (Feb. 12.1986) in "Truth in Criminal Justice Series,"22 U.MICHIGAN JOURNAL OF LAW REFORM 437(1989).
⑤Richard Sylvester,"The Treatment of the Accused,"36 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE ANNALS 16(1910).
①See,e.g. , Paul Cassell and Richard Fowles," Handcuffing the Cops? A Thirty-Year Perspective on Miranda s Harmful Effects on Law Enforcement,"50 STANFORD LAW REVIEW 1055(1998).
②大多数的研究表明,只有不到5％的刑事案件中适用排除规则,而只有2％或者更少的案件中不能定罪。在毒品犯罪案件中数字会多多少少高一些。参见Thomas Davies,"A Hard Look at What We Know (and Still Need to Learn)About the 'Costs'of the Exclusionary Rule:The NIJ Study and Studies of 'Lost' Arrests," 1983 AMERICAN BAR FOUNDA-TION RESEARCH JOURNAL 585.对于抢劫和夜盗案件中逮捕的仔细研究显示了在不到4％的案件中存在自白的问题,不到1％的案件中因此未能定罪,参见Floyd Feeney, Forrest Dill and Adrianne Weir, ARRESTS WITHOUT CON VIC -TION:HOW OFTEN THEY OCCUR AND WHY 144(Washington:U.S. Government Printing Office,1983) .
③记录犯罪的方法以及犯罪统计质量的显著变化使任何氏期的分析都趋于复杂化。
①奥立弗·W·霍尔莫斯:《普通法》,第1页（1881年）。
②Dick v. United States, 443-444 U. S. 428 ( 2000).

上一篇：社会危害性理论之辨正

下一篇：论被害人诉讼地位的理论基础

参考文献(References)：

友情链接