真相、后果与“排除合理怀疑”——以“复旦投毒案”为例

Truth,Consequence and Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

证明标准的界定与适用是刑事司法领域中的经典难题。我国刑诉法对"排除合理怀疑"这一表述的引入在理论界和实务界造成了认知混乱。在广受关注的"复旦投毒案"中,控辩双方围绕"合理怀疑"的涵义发生争议,表明基于道德义务论的立场确定证明标准的传统进路是失败的。而采取后果主义立场和经济分析方法,在"真相"与"后果"之间寻求权衡,则有助于人们更好地理解、把握刑事司法程序中的证明标准问题。

Determining the applicable standard of proof is a difficult problem in criminal procedure. The formulation of ＂beyond a reasonable doubt,＂ as it was introduced into China＇ s Criminal Procedural Law, has brought about confusions among both academics and practitioners. In the highly publicized criminal proceedings of ＂the Fudan Poisoner,＂ the dispute between prosecution and the defense over the meaning of ＂a reasonable doubt＂ suggests that the traditional approach, refleeting the moral deontological mode of thinking common among lawyers, has largely failed in properly devising usable standards of proof. Instead a better understanding of the standard of proof problem in criminal procedures should draw on eonsequentialism and economic analysis and may be reached through careful trade - offs between the pursuit of factual truth and the consideration of social welfare consequences.