郭文利

（浙江省湖州市中级人民法院，浙江湖州 313000）

【摘 要】刑事司法中印证式采纳言词笔录的实践不仅曲解了证据印证的要求，而且会错误激励侦控行为，虚化庭审质证程序，容易酿成冤假错案，理应被否定。刑事司法出现这种实践的根本原因在于对证据真实性的模糊认识，不仅误读了证据真实性，还将其在言词笔录中理解为内容真实。除此之外，对证据鉴真也存在错误认识，既将证据鉴真等同于鉴别材料内容的真实，又将其理解为证据采纳与否的充要条件。抽象而言，言词笔录的证据资格审查标准应为关联性与可靠性，而非我们通常所强调的关联性、真实性与合法性。同时，判断言词笔录可靠性的标准又有更为丰富的内涵，刑事法官应当围绕于此展开调查与认证。

【关键词】印证式采纳；言词笔录；证据资格；真实性；可靠性

【中图分类号】D915.13

【文献标识码】A

【文章编号】1674-1226（2015）06-0686-08

Reflection of the practice of admitting custodial statements by corroboration in criminal trials. Guo Wenli.Huzhou Intermediate People’s Court, Huzhou City of Zhejiang Province, 313000

【Abstract】The practice to admit custodial statements by corroboration in criminal trials should be rejected,because such practice not only misconstrues the purpose of corroboration, but also misleads police investigation or government prosecution. Such practice also virtualizes in court cross-examination, and would easily cause wrongful convictions. The fundamental reason for this practice is the vague cognition of the authenticity of evidence. The authenticity of evidence is miscomprehended as the content of custodial statements must be true. Moreover, the authentication of evidence is also miscomprehended. Authentication is wrongfully taken as requiring the content of custodial statements being true, and also as the necessary and sufficient condition of the admissibility of the evidence. In general, the test of admitting custodial statements should be relevance and reliability rather than relevance, authenticity and legality that are emphasized ordinarily in Chinese judicial practice. In the meanwhile, there is abundant connotation to the standard of deciding the reliability of custodial statements. The judge presiding criminal trials should focus on the relevance and reliability of evidence in the investigation and identification process.

【Key Words】 Admissibility by corroboration, Custodial statements, Evidence admissibility, Authenticity,Reliability