2012 ( 2 ) ( )? ( )?????? ( ) 2 1 : :2

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "2012 ( 2 ) ( )? ( )?????? ( ) 2 1 :http://book.163.com/special/pkhanhan/ :2"

儡衡
7 years ago
Views:

1 216 Evidence Science Vol.20 No * ; ; D A (2011) Analysis of Han Han Ghost Gate Event from the Perspective of Evidence Law. Chen Wei School of Law Beihang University Abstract Han Han ghost gate event has become a public event. Han Han claimed he would sue Fang Zouzi for the infringement of his reputation. If the claim is accepted by the court the court will judge whether the Fang Zouzi s accusation is true or not. The burden of proof in the case can be allocated by the court. Fang proves his accusation with indirect evidence by adopting an experience rule by which each individual probably has his (her) own conclusions; therefore Fang s reasoning is very controversial. Although the court has right of free discretion to judge the authenticity of the event considering the pressure of public opinion the court might very probably concludes the authenticity is unclear due to the insufficient evidences by applying the rule of proof burden and avoiding the fact-finding. Even though Fang will not be subject to the infringement of Han s reputation. And the court can realize the balance between free speech and right to reputation by identifying the fault elements. Through this case the public s awareness of the forensic science has been greatly increased although there are some irrational matters existing. Key Words Presumption of fact Unclear authenticity Fault Right to reputation *

2 2012 ( 2 ) ( )? ( )?????? ( ) 2 1 : :

3 218 Evidence Science Vol.20 No ( ) :?? : : ; ( ) ( ) ( ) : :

4 2012 ( 2 ) 219 : ? ( ) 6 (2004) ( ) 13 7 (2006) (2007) 2715

5 220 Evidence Science Vol.20 No : ; ; 9 : ; : : ; ( ) ( ) 9 [ ] : [ ] : : :

6 2012 ( 2 ) : : ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) : 1. ( ) ( ) 2. ( ) ( ) 3. (2006 ) : ; 14 : : : :

7 222 Evidence Science Vol.20 No ; 17 ; ? : 19? : 18 : : [ ] : : ( 4 )

8 2012 ( 2 ) 223?? : ; : :

9 224 Evidence Science Vol.20 No ; 25 ; ; ; 26 :(1) ;(2) :(1) ;(2) ;(3) 27?? 23 : : [ ] : : : ~192

10 2012 ( 2 ) 225 : ; ; ( ) ? 29 : : : :

11 226 Evidence Science Vol.20 No : : shtml

12 2012 ( 2 ) ? 36 :

13 228 Evidence Science Vol.20 No ?? :(1) (2) (3) 39 ( ) ; ; 40? : : : index.html : (2002) : : :

14 2012 ( 2 ) New York Time Co.v.Sullian 42 (falsity) (reckless) : ( ) ; : ~ See Curtis Publishing Co. V. Butts 388 U. S: 130(1967); Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc. 418 LI. S. 323 (1974). 44 : : :

15 230 Evidence Science Vol.20 No ( ) 47 ; ( ) : ; : : : : : : :

16 2012 ( 2 ) 231 ; ;? ( : ; : ) ( : )

124 中南大学学报 ( 社会科学版 ) 2014 年第 20 卷第 2 期 2. 专门惩戒法 1931 年 6 月 8 日, 国民政府颁行了公务员惩戒法 [6] 该法共二十八条, 六章, 包括通则惩戒处分审议程

124 中南大学学报 ( 社会科学版 ) 2014 年第 20 卷第 2 期 2. 专门惩戒法 1931 年 6 月 8 日, 国民政府颁行了公务员惩戒法 [6] 该法共二十八条, 六章, 包括通则惩戒处分审议程第 20 卷第 2 期中南大学学报 ( 社会科学版 ) Vol.20 No.2 2014 年 4 月 J. CENT. SOUTH UNIV. (SOCIAL SCIENCE) Apr. 2014 南京国民政府法官惩戒程序研究李凤鸣 ( 华东政法大学法律学院, 上海,200042) 摘要 : 自清末修律以来, 关