论文部分内容阅读
近来有许多学者提出“科技证据”这一概念,并普遍认为“科技证据”一般指运用科技手段或方法所获得的证据,主要包括鉴定结论和视听资料等。目前的主流观点还认为“科技证据”是一种新的证据,甚至是证据之王。但随之“科技证据”被重新鉴定的事件屡有发生。本文认为诸如鉴定结论,视听资料等这些被普遍认为的“科技证据”并不能称之为证据,因为它们并不具备证据的本质属性,更不符合证据的基本特征。
Recently, many scholars have proposed the concept of “scientific evidence” and generally believe that “scientific evidence” generally refers to the evidence obtained through scientific and technological means or methods, mainly including the conclusion of identification and audio-visual materials. The current mainstream view also holds that “scientific evidence” is a new kind of evidence, even the king of evidence. But then “scientific evidence” has been re-identified the incident occurred frequently. This paper argues that such widely recognized “scientific evidence” as conclusion of appraisal, audio-visual materials and so on can not be called evidence because they do not possess the essential attribute of evidence and do not conform to the basic characteristics of evidence.