论重复供述排除规则

The Exclusionary Rule of Repeated Confessions

英美和德国采"个案分析"模式来处理重复供述问题。我国的"原则加例外"模式是一种固定、封闭的分析体系,对裁判文书网上47个案例的考察表明,该模式和司法实务出现了脱节。我国应改采"个案分析"模式,要求法官结合个案情形,综合考虑诸多因素来审查判断重复供述。这些因素包括《办理刑事案件严格排除非法证据的规定》第5条中列举的违法行为、行为影响、供述内容、主体变更和加重告知义务,以及第5条没有涉及的律师介入、两次讯问的间隔和环境、前后供述的一致性等其他因素。明确考量因素能够指导并监督法官合理进行"个案分析"。此外,不能"推定"重复供述是先前违法行为所得,而应按照"推论关系"建构重复供述的证明机制。

The UK,US and Germany all adopt the case-based analysis model to review the admissibility of repeated confessions. By contrast,China has established the"principle plus exception"model,which bespeaks a fixed and closed analytic approach. My empirical study of 47 cases released on China Judgment Online indicates a gap between China’s model in law and in practice. We must therefore adopt the case-based analysis model and ask the court to examine repeated confessions in consideration of relevant factors,including the initial violation and its impacts,contents of confessions,the change of interrogators,the obligation of notifying,and other factors that are yet included in the law,such as counsel’s interventions,the time and environment of initial and subsequent interrogations,consistency of confessions. Factors and their evaluation can guide and supervise judges’ discretion in the case-based analysis model. Besides,repeated confessions cannot be presumed to the products of the initial violation,rather,they must be proved in accordance with the"inference relationship".