论文部分内容阅读
在对现场痕迹物证的使用上存在偏差发生在崂山区大麦岛村的“96·8·29”李红珍被害案中,技术人员在现场提取了一枚鞋印,当时判断可能是案犯所留。但抓获黄法齐后,经反复审查和调查,证实他从未穿过类似的鞋子。有鉴于此,我们在侦查破案中使用现场痕迹物证或依据其制定侦查方向划定侦查范围时必须慎重,否则可能“失之毫厘,谬以千里”。暂住人口的管理控制等基础工作亟待加强从目前青岛市查获的犯罪成员情况看,流窜犯占18％强,如果加上未破案件,这类人员作案会占更大比例。像黄法齐这样在青岛住了8年,有4年时间在不断犯罪而未被查获,反映出我们对外来暂住人员在管理、查控等基础工作中存在很多漏洞。另外,对流窜犯作案的案件侦破的办法不多,力度不
Deviations in the use of on-the-spot evidence were found in the case of Li Hong-chen, “96.8.29” in Damaisima Village, Laoshan District. Technicians took a shoe print on the scene and judged that the case was likely to be left behind. However, after the capture of Wong Fat Fai, after repeated review and investigation, he confirmed that he had never been through similar shoes. In view of this, we must exercise caution when using on-the-spot evidence in the detection of cases of detection or in delineating the scope of investigations according to their direction of investigation. Otherwise, we may “miss the slightest mistake and be miles away.” The basic work such as the management and control of temporary residents urgently needs to be strengthened. Judging from the current situation of criminal members seized in Qingdao City, the infringing people account for 18% of the total. If the unjust cases are added, such crimes will account for a larger proportion. Like Huang Faqi living in Qingdao for eight years, four years of continuous crimes have not been seized, reflecting our foreign temporary staff in the management, check and control and other basic work there are many loopholes. In addition, there are few ways to crack down on cases of committing crimes and crimes, and efforts are not made