外行何以评价内行?——专家意见证据的评价原理

How Can a Layman Evaluate an Expert?--The Evaluation Principle of Expert Opinion Evidence

专家意见证据的重要性日渐显著,但因其兼具“意见性”与“专门性”的特点,导致法官很难做出评价。从美国专家意见证据的历史变迁可以看出,事实证言与意见证言的区分是相对的,常识与专门知识之间也没有不可通约的壁垒。借助“三段论结构”,法官得以在对推论基础的追问中消解“意见性”;通过“可靠性指征”,法官能够用间接评价的方式应对“专门性”。这对完善我国专家意见证据的评价制度不无启示意义。

Expert opinion evidence is becoming increasingly significant, but it is difficult for judges to evaluate the evidence because of its "opinality" and "specificity". As the history of expert opinion evidence in the United States shows, the distinction between fact testimony and opinion testimony is relative, and there is usually no incommensurable barrier between specialized knowledge and common sense. With the help of the syllogism structure, the judge can eliminate the "opinality" of evidence in the questioning of the basis of inference. With "reliability indicator", the judge can handle the "specificity" of evidence by means of indirect evaluation. This has implications to improve the evaluation system of the identification and expert assessor in China.