有关间接证据的四大认识误区及澄清

Four Misunderstandings on Indirect Evidence and their Clarifications

我国诉讼法学界对间接证据的传统认识存在以下四点错误:间接证据的本质特点在于不独立和不直接;"运用间接证据证明"等同于"完全依靠间接证据定案";间接推理等同于间接证明;"运用间接证据证明"和"事实上推定"存在本质区别。正确的看法应该是:间接证据的本质特点在于需要运用逻辑进行推理;"运用间接证据证明"不等于"完全依靠间接证据定案";间接推理不等于间接证明;"运用间接证据证明"和"事实上推定"不存在本质区别。

There are four common errors existing in the traditional understanding of the indirect evidence theory. The essential character of indirect evidence is dependent and indirect. ＂Proof by means of indirect evidence＂ is equivalent to ＂making a ver- dict solely relying on indirect evidence＂. Indirect reasoning is equivalent to indirect proof. ＂Proof with indirect evidence＂ is to- tally different from ＂deduction from facts＂. It is rectified therefore as that, the essential character of indirect evidence is the ne- cessity to apply logical reasoning; ＂proof by means of indirect evidence＂ is not equivalent to ＂making a verdict solely relying on indirect evidence＂ ; indirect reasoning is not equivalent to indirect proof; and there is no essential difference existing between ＂proof with indirect evidence＂ and ＂deduction from facts＂.