浅析行政诉讼中证人出庭现状

在行政诉讼中,证人一般情况不出庭作证,因此不利于法院公正及时的审理行政案件.本文通过对证人不出庭作证的现状分析,提出几点建议,目的在与完善行政诉讼中的证人出庭制度.     

浅议强制证人出庭作证的必要性

随着我国民事审判制度改革的不断深入,强化庭审功能是一项重要内容,这就必然要求所有证据包括证人证言都应当在开庭时出示并经双方当事人质证.证人证言在一些案件中显得尤为重要,证人不出庭作证导致当事人无法质证,法官在庭上不能接触证人,最终影响司法公正.为改变证人不出庭作证的现状,有必要借鉴吸收其他国家和地区的立法经验,结合我国国情,作出相应的法律规定.     

证人出庭制度的构建

现阶段在我国审判实践中,证人出庭率很低,这对审判方式改革和司法公正都造成了严重影响。究其原因,有传统文化影响、立法上漏洞、国家对证人保护不够以及未给予证人经济补偿等。因此有必要采取完善立法、加强对证人进行保护、强制证人出庭以及对证人进行相应经济补偿等措施,这样有利于提高证人出庭率。     

刑事诉讼中强制证人出庭作证之我见

本文作者根据多年检察系统工作经验,认为证人不出庭作证是我国司法审判的一大难题,强制证人出庭作证在我国能否行得通一直是学术界和司法界争论和研究的热点问题之一,曾经有多名专家学者对此提出:强制证人出庭作证.其实,强制证人出庭缺乏基本传统法律文化和社会现行状况支持,而且也不符合权利与义务相一致的原则和非法证据排除规则,同时也不符合法律对证据的要求.这些对于强制证人出庭作证来说是一个非常大的障碍.     

鉴定人制度比较研究

比较英美法的专家证人制度和大陆法的鉴定人制度的异同及其优劣势,认为两大制度的不同是由多方面原因造成的,两种制度互相融合已成为一种趋势.     

我国警察出庭作证问题的立法分析

警察出庭作证制度在我国是否有法律依据长期存在着争论.<刑事诉讼法>的规定存在适用规则并不明确的缺点,其他法律文件又存在效力等级低的问题.虽拔最终解决的方法是统一立法规定,但权宜之计在于正确理解立法.     

对单位证人的主体资格的质疑

我国现行民事诉讼法将单位纳入证人主体的范围.然而,根据证人的法律资格的理论,证人应仅限于自然人,我国应废弃单位的证人主体资格,将单位的证明文件作为书证看待.     

时效制度对6063合金导热性能和硬度的影响

研究了时效时间、时效温度对6063合金导热性能和硬度的影响。发现随着时效时间的延长，导热率上升．但由于时效初期析出β“相具有大量的空位，使得导热率在时效开始阶段有所下降。而硬度在随着粒子的析出逐渐升高达到峰值后的过时效过程中，细小针状的β‘相向粗大球状的β相转变，使得硬度开始下降。而时效温度的不同将影响这两种性能峰值出现的早晚，且时效温度越高，硬度峰值越低。     

一种催化剂及其回收和利用该催化剂进行煤炭低压液化的方法

本发明公开了一种催化剂及其回收和利用该催化剂进行煤炭低压液化的方法。催化剂活性高、反应速度快，产气率低，产油率高，反应压力低，催化剂可全部回收循环使用。同时利用该催化剂进行煤炭低压液化的方法工艺简单，操作方便，耗氢量低，生产成本低。     

高硫低氟铁精矿生产球团矿工艺制度的探索

本文叙述了高“Ｓ”低“Ｆ”铁精矿生产团矿造成转古低废的现场情况和我们的攻关过程，并给出了造成转古低废的理论解释。     

Mock Jurors' Perceptions of Child Witnesses: The Impact of Judicial Warning.

The present study examined the impact of a judicial warning, witness age, and the method of testimony presentation on mock jurors' perceptions of credibility of witnesses and accused, and on guilty verdicts. The participants were 435 undergraduate university students who listened to an audio-taped summary of a theft trial followed by abbreviated instructions to the jury. Witness age was 7, 10, or 23, the jury warning was either present or absent when witnesses were children, and the testimony by the prosecution eyewitness and accused were either presented or summarized. For the taped testimony conditions, the mock witnesses and the accused read a fact pattern describing the events in the case and were audiotaped as they answered a series of questions, which constituted direct and cross-examination. The testimony of the 7-year-old child, compared to the 10-year-old, was associated with lower cognitive competence and higher suggestibility, but also with higher accuracy of recall (lower mistaken recollection) and lower credibility of accused. The pattern of results for appraisal of the older child was more similar to that of an adult witness. The young adult was judged to be less trustworthy than children of either age. While the presence of a warning had no impact on guilty verdicts when a 7-year-old was a witness, there were fewer guilty verdicts when a witness was 10 years old. Participants also made fewer guilty verdicts when a young adult's testimony, compared to conditions involving child witnesses, was presented, but not when it was summarized. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When the psychologist testifies.

Prompted by an article by J. L. McCary (see record 1961-01526-001), author Wolfgang Schwarz wanted to relate his own experiences of being an expert witness. The introduction in the article by McCary states that "this case material should familiarize the psychologist with some of the usual problems encountered in testifying as an expert witness." However, Schwarz's qualifications as an expert witness were not challenged to the degree related in McCary's experiences. McCary's presentation in its condensed and extensive deleted form does not allow for an evaluation regarding the specific testimony. Expert testimony experiences have led Schwarz to the conclusion that satisfactory preparation for the court requires command of the material about which one is testifying, a thorough knowledge of behavioral norms and psychopathology, and an adequate fund of general information. McCary's case material may be unusual in the amount of repartee it contains and the number of ad hominem exchanges. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The psychologist as an expert witness in court.

"An important problem in psychology today is the legal status of the psychologist and his relationship to the courts; and of special importance in the position of the psychologist as an expert witness… . There is considerable evidence of the use of psychologists in court cases in the federal courts… " as well as in state courts. "There is… conflicting evidence as to state court opinions on the expertness of testimony given by psychologists… . Once an adequate definition of a psychologist is established by legal authorities… [the problem of the position of the psychologist as an expert witness]… will be much nearer to a solution." Certification or licensing legislation seems to be desirable. 29 references. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A Psychologist as a Legal Witness.

This comment discusses a court case--Hidden vs. The Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York--which involves the qualifications of a psychologist as an expert witness. The testimony of a psychologist, offered by the insured to prove that he was mentally ill, had been excluded by the Trial Judge on the ground that, not being a medical man, the psychologist was not a qualified expert; however, the Court of Appeals on this ground alone reversed the decision of the lower court for the defendant, arguing that the expert was qualified in his field by academic training and by experience. The author notes that this case helps establish the position of psychologists in our society. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Scientific study of witness memory: Implications for public and legal policy.

The legal system relies heavily on human memory. Crime investigations, criminal trials, and many civil trials depend on memory to reconstruct critical events from the past. Over the last 20 years or so, psychologists have developed a specific research literature on witness testimony. This research has been directed primarily at eyewitnesses, such as victims or bystanders to a criminal event. This issue of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law is devoted to the potential contributions of the scientific study of witness testimony to public policy and legal issues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-efficacy and confidence: Theoretical distinctions and implications for trial consultation.

Self-Efficacy Theory (SET; Bandura, 1986, 2000) has generated research and practice ramifications across areas of psychology. However, self-efficacy has yet to be assessed in a legal context. This article juxtaposes self-efficacy with self-confidence in terms of theoretical foundations and practical implications, with attention to the area of witness testimony. It is concluded that the concept of witness self-efficacy possesses thorough theoretical grounding as a potential target for witness preparation. As such, we put forth an integrated model of witness preparation featuring self-efficacy–bolstering techniques within an established witness-training framework. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychological Testimony in a Courtroom.

In view of the unclear precedent concerning the admissibility of psychological test evidence in a court of law, the author reports to fellow psychologists in some detail an experience which he had in the early part of 1954 as an expert witness in a courtroom litigation. The author feels that it may be profitable to be informed of instances when a colleague is privileged to give testimony as an expert. Perhaps, in this way psychologists can collect a body of cases which will help establish legal provision for the admission of psychological test data in a courtroom. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How Jurors Use and Misuse Character Evidence.

The Federal Rules of Evidence allow defendants to offer testimony about their good character, but that testimony can be impeached with cross-examination or a rebuttal witness. It is assumed that jurors use the defense's character evidence (CE) to form guilt and conviction judgments but use impeachment evidence only to assess the character witness's credibility. Two experiments tested these assumptions by presenting mock jurors with various forms of CE and impeachment. Participants made trait ratings for the character witness and defendant and guilt and conviction judgments. Positive CE did not affect guilt or conviction judgments, but cross-examination caused a backlash in which judgments were harsher than when no CE was given. Using path analysis, the authors tested a model of the process by which CE and impeachment affect defendant and witness impressions and guilt and conviction judgments. Implications for juror decision making are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A confidence-credibility model of expert witness persuasion: Mediating effects and implications for trial consultation.

Trial consultation is a quickly growing domain of professional practice for psychologists. Preparing expert witnesses to testify is just one prime example of practice options for consultants. A wealth of evidence shows that developing expert confidence and credibility are important goals for witness training. However, research has yet to articulate a list of testimony delivery skills needed to bolster perceptions of credibility and agreement with the expert. The present study advances expert credibility theory and trial consultation practice by empirically validating a confidence-credibility mediation model of expert witness persuasion. It is argued that this model, grounded in credibility and confidence theories, can be integrated with existing methods of witness preparation training. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)