探索边界——评析公证“陷阱取证”证据

Exploration boundary——Comment on “trap evidence collection” evidence

在公证领域中,针对"陷阱取证"搜集得到的证据是否合法,无论是学术界还是司法实务界都有过激烈的讨论。在"北大方正"陷阱取证一案中,一审法院和二审法院的判决更是截然不同,直至最高院提审该案,才使此案尘埃落定。本文分别讨论公证领域机会提供型"陷阱取证"的合法性与犯意诱发型"陷阱取证"的合理性,试图对这个问题探究一二。

In the field of notarization, whether it is legal to collect evidence with trap, there are intense discussion both in academic circle and judicial practice circle. In the trap evidence case of“Founder of Peking University”, the decision of the court of first instance and the court of second instance is entirely different, until the Supreme Court arraignment makes the case settled. In this paper, we discuss the legitimacy of the"trap evidence col ection"and the rationality of the"trap evidence col ection", try to explore this problem.