|
The thesis including preface、conclusion and main text is on the legal proof andits influence on the modern evidencial system.And the main text is composed of fourparts.Part one:The history development of system of legal evidence,is composed ofburgeon,embryonic form,initial shape,formation and background of its formation.We can find something in legislations of dating from the fifteenth centuryB.C,for example, one witness may not make a statement against a man in relation tosin or wrongdoing which he has done:on the word of two or three witnesses aquestion in to be judged This is the period of rudiment of it. The about10centuriesfrom about450B.C(lex duodecim tabularum issued and implemented) to A.D534,when the emperor of Lower Empire compiled the documents of Roman Law,belong tothe perion of embryonic form.About from the4th century,the development of it wasmoved forward a single step.In this period,relevant laws difinited the degree ofeffectiveness of evidences,detailed the qualification,quantity,special status and specialrelation of witness,which is the period of initial shape of it.Up to15thand16th,thesystem of legal evidence was laid down.Part two:The contents of system of legal evidence,is composed of the source oflaw of system of legal evidence,basic framework of system of legal evidence,and itsrelation to some correlative systems.The competency of evidence of evident material was provided definitely in thesystem of legal evidence.Under the system of legal evidence,the evidences recognizedincluded testimony of witnesses,confessions,written documents,and presumptions.At the point of probative value,the evidence was divided into completeproof,direct presumption,and indirect presumption.The complete proof is thefoundation of a judicial murder without any other evidences.The evidence waslegitimate and complete,when all condition that the legislation provided wassatisfied.Obtaining the complete proof is necessary to declare a judicial murder;The direct presumption was called half proof,and can not solely be a foundation of ajudicial mueder.However,it is a foundation of torture;The indirect presumption iscomplement evidence,and only a complement evidence of direct presumption.Part three:The argument is about the system of legal evidence.It is a veryimportant judicial mode of proof in the judicial history.Through th ages,people passeddifferent judgements on it.The paper arranges the present acedamic evaluations onit,and genetalizes the evaluations into negation theory,affirmation theory,andeclecticism.The negation theory viewed that it included a lethal flaw in itself,namelyit absolutized the different valuation of the different evidences,and forced the judgesto evaluate the evidence mechanically and standardly in disregard of the concretecondition of different cases.The affirmation theory viewed that it reflected on theformless,unprincipled inquisitory procedure with the arbitrariness of judges in theEarly Middle Ages,so it played an important role in inhibiting the subjectivity of thejudges in the litigious process.The eclecticism viewed that we should look upondialectically it.On the one hand,we should cognize the flaws of it,and on the otherhand,we should understand the positive role that it gived play.Part four:The influence of the system of legal evidence on the modern evidencialsystem.The paper discourses separately the influence of it on the system of modernevidencial system,the limit of the judges under the principle of discretionalevidence,and the rise of the scientific and technical evidence.
|