非法证据排除的典范—宁波章国锡受贿案评析.pdfVIP

也应当包含无形的精神折磨。只要是侦查机关基于获取口供的目的对犯罪嫌疑人 实施了身体、精神的折磨，客观上造成了犯罪嫌疑人身体上或者精神上的痛苦就 应当算是“刑讯逼供”。 第四部分提出了我国排除非法证据的具体设想，这是本文的重点。本部分的 分析从实践和理论两个层面进行。当前我国非法证据排除规则难以得到贯彻的一 个重要原因就是有罪推定的司法理念根深蒂固，加之采用庭审印证的诉讼模式， 导致非法证据难以在庭审中被排除。在此情况下，笔者认为在实践中排除非法证 据需要法院、辩护律师、侦查机关三方的共同努力，只有控、辩、审三方各司其 职，积极、合法地履行自己的诉讼职能才能够使非法证据得以排除。在具体的制 度构建上，则要以已经确立的非法证据排除规则为中心，首先进一步明确非法证 据的排除范围，法律应当明确规定非法方法的内涵和外延，包括什么样的方法是 法律认为的非法方法，以及非法方法所造成的结果。其次强化对于非法证据的审 查，笔者认为，应当建立由检察院和法院双重审查的司法审查机制，由检察官和 法官进行预审，以保障非法证据得以排除。第三则是建立排除非法证据的保障措 施，不管是法官、检察官、还是律师，都需要对排除非法证据承担相应的责任。 最后是建立排除非法证据的保障措施，在贯彻排除非法证据的过程中要设置相应 的制度对权利受害者进行救济、对侵害人进行制裁。 关键词：非法证据；刑讯逼供；刑事诉讼 Abstract With “the Rule of Eliminate the Illegal Evidence in Criminal Case, and the 3 Rule of Examine Evidence in Death Penalty Cases.” Review the provisions of the illegal evidence exclusion once again become the focus of the criminal procedure by everyone attention. The main purpose of the exclusion of illegal evidence is not only to protect the legitimate rights and interests of criminal suspects and defendants, but also because the legality of the proceedings, the legitimacy of. Although China has passed laws and relevant judicial interpretation clearly defines illegal evidence exclusion rule, but also on the specific content set appears to be too general, the rule has not been a good implementation of. Therefore, how to improve the illegal evidence exclusion rules and make it effective in practice to implement significant. Tin Cheungs case as a model for Chinas exclusion of illegal evidence exclusion of illegal evidence in judicial practice set an example, the accumulation of experience. In this paper, the case as cited in the analysis and evaluation of the case based on the idea of Chinas exclusion of illegal evidence. Text of this paper is divided in