I. Documentary evidence and material evidence

1. Documentary evidence refers to all articles, symbols and graphics that can find out the truth of a case according to the expressed thoughts and recorded contents. Its probative power is characterized by objective truth being stronger than verbal evidence. Therefore, the cross-examination of documentary evidence generally aims at:

(1) Whether documentary evidence is forged or altered, that is, whether it is original, original, duplicate or abridged, is controversial. This needs to explain the original extraction and discovery process;

(two) whether the documentary evidence is related to the facts of the case;

(3) Whether the channels for obtaining documentary evidence are legal;

(4) The conclusion of documentary evidence appraisal is controversial;

(5) Review the original author of documentary evidence and whether there is any contradiction with other evidence;

2. Physical evidence is all the items and traces that can be used to find out the real situation of a case. These items and traces include tools for committing crimes, objects infringed by acts, traces and objects left in the course of acts, and other items and traces that can expose and prove the occurrence of cases. Compared with other evidence, physical evidence is more intuitive and easy to grasp, and more objective and true than verbal evidence. The cross-examination of physical evidence is generally:

(1) Whether the material evidence is original, its collection method, source and preservation method;

(2) whether there is any connection with the facts of the case, that is, what is the objective connection with the main criminal facts and what evidence can be proved for the main criminal facts;

(3) Whether there is any other evidence to support it. Such as whether the murder weapon has been identified by the defendant, whether the blood is identified, whether it is consistent with the blood type of the victim or the defendant, whether there is testimony to prove who took the murder weapon, whether it is contradictory with other evidence, and whether it is reasonable to eliminate the contradiction;

Second, witness testimony.

Witness testimony refers to the statement of some or all the facts of a case made by a person who knows the true situation of the case to the case handler. A witness's statement can be heard or seen by himself or told by others. However, the source of information must be stated, and information that cannot be said or heard from hearsay cannot be used as witness testimony. As witness testimony is a statement made to the judicial organ by the witness's perception and memory of the facts of the case, every testimony is influenced and interfered by subjective and objective factors, and every witness will be influenced by personal perception, memory and expression ability, and mistakes will occur. In view of the instability and variability of witness testimony, the focus of cross-examination is:

(1) Whether the testimony was legally obtained. Several people participated in the inquiry, whether it was conducted alone, whether it was in compliance with legal procedures, whether it was extorted by torture, whether it was induced or deceived, whether the location of the inquiry was in compliance with the law, whether the defender asked whether the witness concerned had obtained the consent of the victim, whether it was approved by the relevant department, and whether the testimony obtained by the defender had been examined and prosecuted.

(2) Whether the source of witness testimony is direct or indirect;

(three) whether the testimony provided by the witness is illegally interfered by the outside world, whether it is instigated, bought or threatened by the parties or others;

(four) whether the witness and the parties have an interest in the case;

(5) How to express the witness's feelings about objective things, whether the statement is accurate and profound, the length of memory, the strength of language expression ability, the mental state when feeling things, and the objective environment when feeling things;

(six) whether there is any contradiction between the testimony of individual witnesses and other evidence;

(7) In addition, the character and criminal record of witnesses may also be questioned. If the witness's testimony is repeated many times and there is a record of administrative or criminal punishment, the probative force of the evidence can be reduced.

Three. Statements and excuses of criminal suspects and defendants

The confessions and excuses of criminal suspects and defendants refer to the statements made by criminal suspects and defendants to investigators, prosecutors and judges on relevant cases. Because the suspect and the defendant are the center of criminal proceedings, the outcome of the case has a vital interest with him. His position determines that the statements and excuses of criminal suspects and defendants are more likely to be false or mixed. Based on this, court cross-examination should pay attention to:

(1) To analyze the rationality of confession, it is necessary to combine cases;

(two) analysis of the motives and conditions of the defendant's confession;

(3) There is no illegal act in interrogating the defendant. Many defendants retract their confessions because they extort confessions by torture, and the defense will seize this point;

(4) Whether there is any contradiction between the confession of the defendant and the confession of the co-defendant and other evidence;

Fourth, the victim's statement

The victim's statement is true and reliable in most cases. But as a victim, he hates and fears the defendant, so his statement is not objective, and it is also subjective and variable evidence. The focus of this cross-examination is:

(1) The usual relationship between the victim and the defendant and the ideological quality of the victim;

(2) Whether the source of the victim's statement is direct or indirect;

(3) Whether the contents stated by the victim are contradictory;

(4) Pay attention to whether the young victim's statement is consistent with his age and language skills;

Verb (abbreviation of verb) evaluation conclusion

Expert conclusion refers to the use of specialized knowledge to identify the specific problems of a case, which is the identification and judgment made by using specialized knowledge, and also becomes an important means to review or identify other evidence. The key points of cross-examination are:

(1) Appraiser's qualification, whether the employment is legal, and whether the appraisal is influenced by external and personal factors;

(2) Whether the materials on which the assessment is based are sufficient and reliable;

(3) whether the argument is sufficient, whether the inference is reasonable, and whether all suspicious circumstances are ruled out;

(4) Whether the appraiser has the professional knowledge and experience to solve the appraisal problems, whether the equipment used is perfect, and whether the methods and operating procedures adopted are scientific.

Six, the inquest and inspection record

The record of inquest and inspection is an objective record of judicial personnel's investigation and research on the scene, articles and personnel related to crime. It plays an important role in correctly identifying the facts of the case and identifying the criminals. It is a kind of evidence with comprehensive proof function. The key points of cross-examination are:

(1) Whether the records of the inquest and inspection meet the statutory requirements, such as whether the personnel who carry out the inquest and inspection have the right of inquest and inspection, whether the witnesses are present, whether they are signed and sealed, etc.;

(2) Whether the contents recorded in the transcript are comprehensive and accurate, and whether there are any omissions in the field situation;

(3) Whether the on-site traces and articles recorded in the transcripts have been destroyed or forged, and whether personal characteristics, injuries or physiological conditions have been forged or altered;

(four) whether there is a direct connection with the facts of the case and whether there is any contradiction with other evidence;

Seven. audio-visual material

Audio-visual materials refer to audio and video materials that can reproduce the original sound and image of the case, related materials stored in computers and information provided by other scientific and technological equipment as materials to prove the true situation of the case. This is a kind of evidence closer to the real situation of the case, and its probative power has the characteristics of directness, image, accuracy, science and comprehensiveness. The cross-examination of this evidence focuses on:

Whether (1) has been forged, altered or edited, and whether it has been identified;

(2) Whether the acquisition method is legal;

(3) Whether it is related to the facts of this case and whether the main criminal facts can be confirmed.

In addition to the contents of the above cross-examination, the public prosecutor is also required to master the skills of cross-examination:

First, the method of witness cross-examination:

1. In the prosecution witness interrogation procedure, the basic information such as the witness's identity, age, gender and occupation should be found out first, so as to show the witness's qualification to the court, and then the witness is required to make a coherent statement of the facts he knows related to the conviction and sentencing of the case. Finally, after the witness makes a coherent statement, the prosecutor will ask the witness questions about what the witness has not made clear or what the statement is missing or contradictory, so as to find out the facts. The fourth is to ask questions raised by defenders. Fifth, when a witness makes a false statement, he should clarify the facts by asking questions. When necessary, the transcripts of testimony provided by witnesses in the stages of investigation, examination and prosecution shall be read out, and the testimonies of other witnesses shall be read out to prove their false statements.

2. Witnesses called by the defense (defense witnesses)

(1) The way the public prosecutor asks the witnesses summoned by the defense: generally, the way of asking questions is adopted. That is, ask questions to witnesses in view of doubts in their statements. For the defense witness, the defender is the main object of questioning, and the prosecutor focuses on the problems existing in his statement in court. Of course, in the process of asking questions, it is also inseparable from the cross-use of inquiry methods such as opening questions and reviewing.

(2) The public prosecutor's questioning and cross-examination procedures for the defense witnesses.

The defense witness is mainly asked by the defense, and the prosecutor only asks questions; According to whether the public prosecutor has contacted the defense witnesses before appearing in court, it can be treated differently:

1. The public prosecutor has known the testimony of the defense witness before the trial, that is, he has collected the testimony record of the witness. The public prosecutor mainly focuses on the differences and contradictions between his testimony in court and his testimony before the trial, which will affect conviction and sentencing. Its methods and procedures can refer to the inquiry of prosecution witnesses.

2. For the defense witnesses and their statements that the public prosecutor didn't know before the trial, that is, the defense witnesses and their testimony transcripts that the public prosecutor didn't contact before the trial, the procedures for the defense witnesses to ask questions in this case are as follows: First, check whether the person who testified in court is qualified as a witness. The second is to examine whether the witness's testimony is influenced by subjective and objective factors such as perception, memory and expression. The third is to examine whether the witness's testimony is illegally influenced by the outside world, such as temptation, deception, bribery, threats, etc. Fourth, it is necessary to find out whether the source of facts confirmed by witnesses is reliable, whether it is what they saw with their own eyes or what they heard from hearsay. Fifth, ask other witnesses and criminal suspects about the facts proved by witnesses, or read other evidence to find out whether the testimony of defense witnesses is consistent with the evidence of the whole case. If the authenticity, objectivity and relevance of the defense witness testimony can be ascertained by the above methods, it can be used as evidence. If the above methods cannot be verified in court, according to whether the facts and circumstances of the case confirmed by them are important, the court may be required not to use the evidence with caution or to continue verification after the court.

(2) Methods and procedures for cross-examination of testimony transcripts.

The new trial mode is adversarial criminal procedure. Witnesses are generally required to testify in court. However, in practice, witnesses are subject to many restrictions and it is impossible for all witnesses to appear in court. According to Article 157 of the Criminal Procedure Law, if a witness does not appear in court or is known to the court, the testimony record of the witness who did not appear in court shall be read out. Therefore, there will be many witnesses' testimony transcripts that need to be read, cross-examined and ascertained in court.

1, the transcript of testimony read by the public prosecutor when cross-examining and giving evidence.

Because the testimony transcripts read by the public prosecutor when testifying are verified by the public prosecutor before the trial, the witness statement transcripts or personal testimony in the investigation, review and prosecution stage can be read directly to the court. What can be read is the whole content of the testimony record, and it can also read its main or key content. Be clear when you read it: first, whether the procedure is legal. Including whether more than two investigators have obtained the certificate, whether to let witnesses check, sign, fingerprint and so on. The second is to explain whether the witness testifies under normal conditions and whether he is accused, threatened, lured or bought. The third is to read clearly the relationship between the facts confirmed by the witness and the case, that is, when the witness confirms the facts of the case or a plot, he explains clearly the time, place, people, behavior, methods, means, results and other related factors. The fourth is to explain the relationship between witnesses, defendants and victims and the source of their testimony. The fifth is to summarize the facts of the case confirmed by the testimony record, that is, to summarize the content of the testimony record, explain the form and comprehensively evaluate the probative force, so that the court can clearly understand what the testimony record proves and what probative force it has.

2. The method of cross-examination of the testimony written by the public prosecutor when the defense gives evidence.

According to whether the public prosecutor understands the testimony written by the defender in court, it can be divided into:

1) When presenting the evidence to the defender, the prosecutor read out part of the testimony record of a witness in the copy of the evidence obtained by the prosecutor from the court. According to the information he has, he made a cross-examination or explanation from the following aspects: First, the prosecutor told the court the only coherent statement of the testimony record made by the same witness in the investigation or prosecution stage. The second is to explain whether the evidence collection procedure of witness testimony is legal and consistent with other evidence. The third is to explain whether the witness's psychological and mental state is normal and whether it is influenced by subjective and objective factors. The fourth is to explain whether the witness testimony record is influenced by the recorder, investigator and other factors, which can cause the correctness and accuracy of the testimony record. From the above aspects, combined with other evidence of the whole case, the public prosecutor comprehensively analyzed the probative force and function of part of the testimony transcripts of the same witness read by the defender. When the defender takes the words out of context, confuses right and wrong, steals the concept, conceals falsehood, and practices fraud, he should analyze the mistakes made by the defender when reading the testimony record according to the integrity of the testimony record and other evidence in the whole case, and use the knowledge of logic and other disciplines, so as to deny the testimony record read by the defender during cross-examination.

(2) For the witness's testimony written by the defender and the copy of the evidence obtained from the court by the prosecutor, the prosecutor's cross-examination is mainly carried out in the following aspects: First, according to the above-mentioned (1) procedures and methods, it is proved that the witness's testimony written by the prosecutor and collected in the investigation or prosecution stage is powerful and effective. When necessary, the court may be required to play the fixed and preserved audio-visual materials and evidence when the witness's testimony record is formed. "The second is to analyze the consistency of the testimony record of the same witness read by the defender, and whether there are mistakes such as taking it out of context, taking it as a whole, stealing concepts, and confusing right and wrong. The third is to analyze whether the testimony written by the defender is legal and whether it is influenced by subjective and objective factors in form and content. Fourth, combine other evidence of the whole case, especially the evidence of the same fact or plot confirmed by the witness and verified by the court, and comprehensively demonstrate the authenticity of this testimony written by the defender. If the above work can deny the hypocrisy of the testimony written by the public prosecutor, it will prove the authenticity and objectivity of the testimony written by the same witness. If the truth of the testimony written by the defender cannot be denied through the above work, there are two ways to solve this problem in practice: the first and best way is to let the witness appear in court and let him be cross-examined in court! Second, leave it to the judge to make a decision based on the evidence of the whole case. However, if the witness's testimony is the main evidence, it will lead to the risk that the facts are difficult to confirm or inaccurate. Therefore, the author thinks: when there are objections or contradictions before the trial, the verification in court is not true, and it is too late to inform the witness to testify in court, which affects the conviction and sentencing, the court should be requested to postpone the trial according to the provisions of Article 165 of the revised Criminal Procedure Law, and the witness should be notified to testify in court "for questioning and cross-examination. If it is not the main evidence, it can be handed over to the judge for comprehensive judgment based on the facts and evidence of the whole case.

(3) The record of testimony read by the defender when testifying was investigated by the defender himself, and the prosecutor had no contact with it before appearing in court. The public prosecutor's cross-examination of the testimony record is mainly carried out from the following aspects: First, the content and form of the testimony record read by the defender are analyzed to prove whether there are illegal acts, subjective and objective factors and recording errors. Second, if the public prosecutor knows the witness, he will analyze whether the witness is influenced by others and the authenticity of the witness's testimony in court from the aspects of the witness's psychological state, moral quality, perception, memory and expression ability. The third is to cross-examine the testimony written by the defender and put forward opinions by analyzing the source of the testimony and its relationship with the case and the whole case. Fourth, if the public prosecutor knows nothing about the witness and his testimony in court, he should comprehensively analyze the correctness, probative force and authenticity of this testimony based on the evidence clearly verified in court, combined with the whole case and the above methods. Through the above methods and degrees, it can be clearly verified and confirmed that it meets the characteristics of evidence before it can be used as evidence; If it cannot be verified clearly, we can refer to the above method (2) to see whether it is the main evidence, and decide whether to postpone the trial, notify the witness to testify in court, or let the court decide on its own according to the evidence of the whole case.