Can a surreptitious recording be used as evidence, and can a surreptitious recording be used as evid

1. Whether the recording is valid mainly depends on whether it is legal and edited, and the legal and complete recording does not require the consent of the person, and can also be used as evidence for the court's judgment.

2. Legal basis:

1) "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" Article 22: Where investigators investigate and collect computer data, audio or video recordings, or other audio-visual materials, they shall request that the person being investigated provide the original carrier of the relevant materials. If it is difficult to provide the original carrier, a copy may be provided. Where copies are provided, investigators shall explain their ** and how they were made in the investigation record.

2) "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" Article 70: Where one party submits the following evidence, and the other party raises objections but there is no evidence to the contrary sufficient to refute it, the people's court shall confirm its probative force:

1) The original documentary evidence or a photocopy, **, duplicate, or excerpt of the original documentary evidence;

2) The original physical evidence or reproductions, video materials, etc., that have been verified to be correct with the original physical evidence;

3) Audio-visual materials that are supported by other evidence and obtained by lawful means, or copies that have been verified to be correct with the audio-visual materials;

4) A record of the inquest of physical evidence or the scene made by a party to the people's court in accordance with legally-prescribed procedures.

Can audio recordings be evidence?

Stealing a recording can be used as evidence, but certain conditions need to be satisfied.

Evidence of stealing audio recordings can be used as evidence, but it needs to have the "three natures" of evidence to have probative power. The three types of evidence mainly refer to authenticity, legitimacy, and relevance.

The acquisition of evidence of surreptitious recordings must comply with the provisions of the law, and the conversation between the two parties to the recording is a free expression of intent, and is bona fide and necessary; The recording evidence has good technical conditions, the identity of the interlocutor is clear, the content is clear, Chang Min is objective, true and coherent, has not been edited or forged, the content has not been altered, there is no doubt about it, and there is other evidence to support it. If the above conditions are met, the audio recorded secretly can be used as evidence.

Audio recordings belong to electronic evidence and audio-visual materials, which are a type and form of evidence, and litigants have the right to submit them to the court as evidence.

Legal analysis: Stealing audio recordings can be used as evidence, but whether they have probative force requires specific analysis. Since the recording materials belong to the electronic evidence and audio-visual materials stipulated in the Civil Procedure Law of our country, they are a type and form of evidence, and the litigants have the right to submit them to the court as evidence, but the hidden travel and stealing recordings may not have probative force, and according to the law, the evidence should have authenticity, legality and relevance in order to prove the facts to be proved, and only then can it have probative power.

Legal basis: Article 63 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China Evidence includes:

1) Statements of the parties; (2) documentary evidence; (3) Physical evidence; (4) audio-visual materials; (5) The number of electronic numbers is the only evidence; (6) Witness testimony;

7) Appraisal opinions; (8) Inquest records. The evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as the basis for determining the facts.

The content of the recording should be truthful and must not. During the recording process, there was no coercion or threat from others. The content of the recording shall explain the facts that need to be proved in the case.

Retain the original recordings.

Legal basis: "Several Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" Article 68: Evidence obtained by methods that infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violate prohibitive provisions of law cannot be used as the basis for assessing the facts of a case. Article 70: It is stipulated that there is other evidence to support and that the audio-visual materials obtained by lawful means are cracked or undoubted, or copies that are verified with the audio-visual materials.

The Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings stipulate that evidence obtained by means that infringes upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violates the prohibitive provisions of the law cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of a case. That is to say, only evidence obtained by infringing upon the lawful rights and interests of others or by means in which the destroyer violates the prohibitive provisions of the law cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of the case.

If the audio or video recordings without the consent of the relevant parties do not infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others, nor do they violate the prohibitions of the law, the audio or video recordings may be used as evidence. At the same time, the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings stipulate that if one party raises objections to the following evidence but does not have sufficient evidence to refute it, the people's court shall confirm its probative force:

3) Audio-visual materials that are supported by other evidence and obtained by lawful means, or copies that have been verified to be correct with the audio-visual materials;

Therefore, two conditions must be met for a surreptitious recording to be legal evidence:

First, the acquisition of recording evidence must comply with the provisions of the law, and the conversation between the two parties to the recording is a free expression of intent, which is good faith and necessary;

The second is that the recording evidence has good technical conditions, the identity of the interlocutor is clear, the content is clear, it is objective, true and coherent, it has not been edited or forged, the content has not been changed, there is no doubt, and there is other evidence to corroborate.

Article 68 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings.

Evidence obtained by methods that infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violate prohibitive provisions of law cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of a case.

Article 70 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings.

Where one party submits the following evidence, and the other party raises objections but does not have sufficient evidence to the contrary, the people's court shall confirm its probative force:

1) The original documentary evidence or a photocopy, **, duplicate, or excerpt of the original documentary evidence;

2) The original physical evidence or reproductions, video materials, etc., that have been verified to be correct with the original physical evidence;

3) Audio-visual materials that are supported by other evidence and obtained by lawful means, or copies that have been verified to be correct with the audio-visual materials;

4) A record of the inquest of physical evidence or the scene of the cultivator made by one party to the people's court in accordance with legally-prescribed procedures.

Secretly recording can be used as evidence for brother Changyu, but if the recording is secretly made, the evidence obtained by means that infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violate the prohibitive provisions of the law is invalid, because the illegally obtained evidence cannot be used as the basis for assessing the facts of the case.

[Legal basis].Article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.

The materials that can be used to prove the facts of the case are all evidence.

Evidence includes: 1) physical evidence;

(2) documentary evidence; 3) witness testimony;

4) Victim statements;

5) Confessions and justifications of criminal suspects or defendants;

6) Appraisal opinions;

7) Records of inquests, inspections, identifications, and investigations;

8) Audio-visual materials and electronic data.

Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as the basis for a verdict.

Article 85 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings.

The people's court shall make a judgment in accordance with law on the basis of the facts of the case that can be proved by the evidence.

Adjudicators shall follow legally-prescribed procedures to comprehensively and objectively review evidence, follow the provisions of the law, follow judges' professional ethics, use logical reasoning and daily life experience, independently make judgments on whether evidence has probative force and the extent of probative force, and disclose the reasons and results for the judgment.