1, opinion evidence rule
The rules of witness testimony must first master the rules of opinion evidence.
The rule of opinion evidence means that the content of witness testimony should be the expression of his personal perception, and should not be speculative, inferential, critical or inferential testimony.
When reading the paper, I found that the witness's testimony was speculative and critical, so I can directly say that this cannot be used as the basis for deciding the case.
There is an exception to the opinion evidence rule, which means that it should be perceived by individuals, and should not be speculative, critical or inferential. However, from the general life experience, unless it is in line with the facts.
2, the evidence ability rules
The rule of evidence ability mainly refers to whether the age, cognitive level, memory ability and expression ability of the witness and physical and mental state affect the testimony.
Testimonies provided by witnesses who are obviously drunk, poisoned by narcotic drugs or drugged by psychotropic drugs, so that they cannot be correctly expressed, cannot be used as evidence.
Both are two-sided judgments. The first aspect of judgment is the time to testify; The second judgment is whether this happens at the scene. If this happens at the scene, it may be that we couldn't perceive the facts correctly at that time, so we should focus on reviewing this question. If you can't testify, you can draw a conclusion directly, but you can't draw a conclusion.
Age and cognitive level should be paid attention to in the rules of evidence ability. This issue should not be confused with capacity for civil conduct and capacity for criminal responsibility, and should be paid attention to when reviewing evidence.
In addition, the evidential ability should be separated from the probative force. If it can't be expressed correctly, it has no evidential force. Those without evidential ability shall not be used as evidence. What is probative force? Some of them can be used as evidence, but they need more proof.
3. Rule of legality of evidence
The procedures and methods for obtaining witness testimony shall comply with laws and relevant regulations, and the witness testimony obtained by the following methods shall not be used as the basis for finalizing the case:
Witness testimony obtained by illegal means such as violence, threat, deception or inducement;
Testimony obtained by questioning witnesses who have no personal behavior;
Written testimony without verification, signature (seal) or fingerprinting by witnesses;
Ask deaf people, ethnic minorities who are not familiar with the local language and writing, and foreigners to provide translation that is not provided.
In a word, the legality of witness testimony should be comprehensively examined in different categories.
4. Correction and cross-examination of defective evidence
How to cross-examine the defective evidence of witness testimony;
If the names of the inquirer, recorder and legal representative, the starting and ending time and place of the inquiry are not filled in the witness testimony record, cross-examination can be conducted from the perspective of objectivity of evidence;
The places where witnesses are questioned do not meet the requirements, such as teahouses, restaurants and detention centers. In this case, there is reason to suspect that the evidence was obtained by cruel, inhuman and torture means. Cross-examination can be conducted from this angle;
If the witness is not informed of his obligations and responsibilities, cross-examination can be conducted from the perspective of whether the witness is deceived or threatened;
If the interrogation record reflects that the same interrogator interrogated different witnesses at the same time, in this case, cross-examination should be conducted from the perspective of whether there is forged evidence in the objectivity of evidence.
5. Rules for the Court to Accept Certificates.
The witness's testimony in court contradicts his testimony in court. If a witness can reasonably explain his testimony in court and has relevant evidence to prove it, the testimony in court shall be accepted. If no reasonable explanation can be given, and his pre-trial testimony is confirmed by relevant evidence, his pre-trial testimony can be accepted.