The server is under maintenance between 08:00 to 12:00 (GMT+08:00), and please visit later.
We apologize for any inconvenience caused
Login  | Sign Up  |  Oriprobe Inc. Feed
China/Asia On Demand
Journal Articles
Laws/Policies/Regulations
Companies/Products
Bookmark and Share
tou pai tou lu shi ting zi liao de zheng ju zi ge he fa xing wen ti chu tan -- yi ka zi su he zhong guo an he tian jin kou mou mou shou hui an wei fen xi dui xiang
Author(s): 
Pages: 112-117
Year: Issue:  4
Journal: Journal of Jiangxi Public Security College

Keyword:  刑事诉讼偷拍偷录视听资料证据资格合法性;
Abstract: 1996年《刑事诉讼法》将视听资料纳入几大证据种类,在我国首创了独立于物证、书证以外的高科技证据种类划分制度。然而,在不断发展的司法规范进程中,视听资料证据的使用渐渐萌生出诸多问题。而被注上“非正常录音、拍摄”和偷拍偷录手段获得的视听资料,则其证据资格的法律规范是否完整是个值得探讨的问题。从“卡兹诉合众国案”和“天津寇某某受贿案”两个个案入手,将我国《刑事诉讼法》与《美国联邦证据规则》及相关判例法从偷拍偷录视听资料证据资格合法性的主体、手段、罪名范围以及相关程序四个方面进行比较分析发现,我国关于证明偷拍偷录视听资料合法性的开示程序是可选择性的,同时,在某些情况下收集该类证据存在侵犯公民隐私权的可能。
Related Articles
No related articles found