论文部分内容阅读
证据以及证据规则在事实认定上起着至关重要的作用。证据是认识案件事实的第一来源,如果证据发生变化,最终的事实文本必然发生重大变化。由于传统的关于案件事实的讨论只关注证据而忽视叙事建构,如果用传统法学理论观察案件事实,我们会感受到证据与事实文本之间存在某种断裂地带,可是这种断裂又不为人所承认,这样的矛盾将导致在证据与事实间的认识、推理问题上,得出一些模糊混乱的理解。笔者因此尝试在这个阶段提出一个推进式的理论框架来弥补这种认识上的断裂感。
Evidence and rules of evidence play a crucial role in the determination of facts. Evidence is the first source of factual knowledge of the case, and if the evidence changes, the final factual version is bound to change significantly. Since the traditional discussion of the facts of the case focuses only on the evidence and neglects the construction of narrative, if we observe the facts of the case by the traditional jurisprudence, we will feel somewhere between the evidence and the factual text, but this kind of rupture is unacceptable , Such a contradiction will lead to understanding and reasoning between evidence and facts, come to some fuzzy understanding of confusion. Therefore, I try to put forward a propulsive theoretical framework at this stage to make up for this sense of fracture.