林国强

【摘 要】 由于审前重复供述的可采性直接关涉非法证据排除规则能否得到有效实施，因而，必须对审前重复供述的可采性做出规范。 域外国家和地区有关判例在判断重复供述可采性时均是分析前次的非法取证行为是否对重复供述产生影响。 此种分析严格来说不是“毒树之果”理论的运用，而是“非法讯问行为持续影响效力”的分析方法。 我国应采用“非法取证行为持续影响效力”的分析方法，以便能在现行的法律框架内为法院排除重复供述提供法律依据。 采用此种分析方法须综合考量个案中的具体因素。 在我国，排除重复供述还面临着前次非法供述难以被排除以及法官自由裁量权过大两方面的困境， 对此应进一步构建和完善相 关制度。

【关键词】 审理前；重复供述；可采性；非法讯问；持续影响

【中图分类号】 D915.13

【文献标识码】 A

【文章编号】 1674-1226（2013）04-0463-11

On Admissibility of the Pretrial Repetitive Confession. Lin Guoqiang, Law School, Southwest University of Political Science and Law, Chongqing, 401120.

【Abstract】 The admissibility of the pretrial repetitive confession has a direct involvement in effective implementation of the exclusionary rule, therefore it is suggested that relevant norms to regulate be stipulated. Precedents in other countries and territories concerning admissibility of the repetitive confession mostly focus on the impact on the repetitive confession the previous illegal acts of obtaining the evidence leave. Strictly speaking, such approach is not the application of “fruit of the poisonous tree”, but one of an analytical method ---“continuous effect of such illegal acts in the interrogation”, a method China adopts. This method provides a legal basis for excluding the repetitive confession within the present framework and requires to consider comprehensively the specific factors in individual cases in its application. In China, further needs to be done in this respect, including the establishment and improvement of relevant mechanism, so as to face the two major challenges involving the difficulties to exclude previous illegal confession and limit the judges’ mighty discretionary power.

【Key Words】 Pretrial, Repetitive Confession, Admissibility, Illegal Interrogation, Continuous Effect