盗窃案件证据标准统一问题实证研究——以中国裁判文书网38699例文书为例

Study on the Unification of Evidence Standards in Theft Cases——Take 38,699 Judgments of China Judgments Online as an Example

基于数据挖掘方法从中国裁判文书网采集38699例盗窃案件法律文书,分析法院裁判盗窃案件中证据使用的地域、法院层级、程序类别和年度分布等差异。研究发现,我国盗窃案件裁判文书中对八类证据的体现程度不一致,司法机关对八类证据的采信程度不同;法官裁判案件常采用"证据确实、充分"的证明标准,很少直接标明采用"排除合理怀疑"证据准则;法院确认或采信的证据远多于不予确认或采信的证据,法院在采信证据方面存在证据类型差异、时间差异、地域差异、法院审级差异、程序类别差异等多方面差异。改进法院裁判证据标准不统一的问题,需要国家在加大案件物证取证方法和技术的应用力度以及提高司法机关的认识程度等多方面做出努力;提高裁判机关对"排除合理怀疑"证明标准的认识程度并加大国家在法律和制度上的有力保障,以此促进该项证据标准落地。

Based on the data mining method,this paper collected 38,899 theft cases from the China Judgments Online and analyzed case evidences in the field of differences among geography,court hierarchy,types of procedures,and the annual distribution.It is found that the inconsistent reflection degree in eight types of evidence in these cases.The degree judged by the judicial organs is quite different.The evidence standards used by judges is"true and sufficient",while"exclusion of reasonable doubts"is rarely directly indicated;the numbers of evidence confirmed or admitted by the court is far more than the evidence that is not confirmed or admitted,but there are differences in types,time,geography,court trials and types of procedures.To improve the consistency,great efforts should be made by the state to evidence collection methods,technical application,as well as the awareness of the judicial organs;It is necessary to improve the understanding of"exclusion of reasonable doubts"and ensure national guarantees on laws and institutions so as to facilitate the implementation of the evidence standards.