Legal analysis: The effective way to rehabilitate grievances is to exclude illegal evidence in the original trial and the second trial through retrial procedure and restore the facts of the case. Although China's criminal procedure law clearly stipulates that the burden of proof of the defendant's guilt in a public prosecution case is borne by the people's procuratorate, the establishment of the facts of the constitutive elements of a crime requires the procuratorial organ to bear the burden of proof, and the facts need to be clear, the evidence is reliable and sufficient.
However, in appeal cases, the court will often conduct a written review to judge whether there is a phenomenon of extorting confessions by torture according to the evidence materials of the original first and second trials, and comprehensively evaluate whether the grounds for appeal are established. This requires the complainant to provide evidence. There are new facts and new evidence that can overturn the facts identified in the original trial, and the burden of proof is reversed.
The exclusion of illegal evidence can be verified by three steps:
1. Provide the retrial court with the interrogation record, medical certificate and the testimony of the detainees in the same cell during the complainant's detention;
2. Submit the audio and video materials of the complainant's original interrogation at the stage involved in the request for the exclusion of illegal evidence to the retrial court; Extorting confessions by torture and false confessions can restore objective facts through the original interrogation audio and video recording.
3. Ask the retrial court to notify other people present or other witnesses to testify in court during interrogation. When necessary, the court may be invited to notify the interrogators to testify in court.
Legal basis: Article 200 of the Civil Procedure Law: If a party's application is under any of the following circumstances, the people's court shall retry it:
(1) There is new evidence sufficient to overturn the original judgment or ruling;
(two) the basic facts identified in the original judgment or ruling lack evidence to prove;
(3) The main evidence of the facts ascertained in the original judgment or ruling is forged;
(four) the main evidence of the facts identified in the original judgment or ruling has not been cross-examined;
(five) the main evidence needed for the trial of the case, the parties can not collect it by themselves due to objective reasons, and apply in writing to the people's court for investigation and collection, but the people's court has not investigated and collected it;
(6) The application of the law in the original judgment or ruling is indeed wrong;
(seven) the composition of the judicial organization is illegal or the judges who should be avoided according to law have not avoided;
(8) A person without capacity for litigation has no legal representative, or a party who should participate in the litigation fails to participate in the litigation due to reasons not attributable to him or his agent ad litem.
Article 201 If the parties present evidence to prove that the legally effective conciliation statement or conciliation violates the principle of voluntariness or the contents of the conciliation agreement violate the law, they may apply for a retrial. If it is verified by the people's court, it shall be retried.