论文部分内容阅读
十八届四中全会着重强调了公正司法、提高司法公信力等问题,然而对于如何提高司法公信力,公正司法等问题都是各持己见众说纷纭。其实司法审判的目的在于确立裁判事实的可接受性这一观念在英美证据法学理论中其实己经成为了了共识。墨菲在《论证据》一书中,对司法审判的性质作了界定:“司法审判并不是追求过去发生之事实的最终真相的探索过程,而是建立一种关于发生过什么事情的版本,这个版本对于过去发生之事实的正确性必须达到可以接受的可能性。”随着社会的发展科技的进步,普通大众交流的方式越来越多人们之间的交流越来越密切,通过各种新媒体对案件的关注度越来越高。当今社会的许多热点案件如“彭宇案”、“将遗产遗赠给情人案”、“莫兆军案”、“许霆案”、“邓玉娇案”等都引起了广泛的关注都突显了司法裁判与社会可接受性在一定范围内的冲突,所以对司法裁判的可接受性的探讨是非常有必要的。
The Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China emphasized issues such as just administration of justice and increased credibility of the judiciary. However, opinions on how to improve the credibility of the judiciary and fair administration of justice all have their own opinions. In fact, the idea of judicial trial is to establish the acceptability of the facts of the referee has actually become a consensus in the Anglo-American legal theory of evidence. Murphy defines the nature of judicial trials in his book On Evidence: “Judicial judgment is not a process of exploring the ultimate truth of what happened in the past, but rather of creating a version of what happened , The correctness of this version must be acceptable for the facts that have occurred in the past. ”As the development of society advances in science and technology, more and more people communicate with each other in the general public more and more through the exchange of people Various new media are paying more and more attention to the case. Many hot cases in today’s society such as “Peng Yu case ”, “legacy to the lover case ”, “Mo Zhao Jun case ”, “Xu Ting case ”, “Deng Yujiao case ” and so on are caused A wide range of concerns have highlighted the conflict between judicial adjudication and social acceptability within a certain range. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss the acceptability of judicial adjudication.