Whether the results of the polygraph will affect the determination of the facts of the case and judi

According to the Supreme People's Court, the provisions make it clear that polygraph results are not a legal form of evidence as stipulated in the Civil Procedure Law, and can only serve as a reference, and the people's court will not entrust an appraisal to avoid using the polygraph results as an appraisal opinion, which will affect the determination of the facts of the case and judicial fairness. This provision is mentioned in the provisions of the Supreme People's Court on several issues concerning the entrusted appraisal and review work in the people's courts' civil litigation issued on the 14th, to solve the outstanding problems existing in judicial practice and further standardize the entrusted appraisal work in civil litigation. According to this provision, the people's court will strictly examine whether the matter to be evaluated is a specialized issue for ascertaining the facts of the case, and the people's court will not entrust an appraisal of facts that can be inferred through common sense and rules of thumb, non-specialized issues that should be presented by the parties, polygraphs, and other circumstances.

It is reported that the provisions also clarify the solutions to the cross-examination of supplementary appraisal materials, the waiver of cross-examination by the parties, and the disputes over appraisal materials, the form and content of the appraiser's letter of commitment, and the time limit requirements for appraisal. In addition, in order to protect the public interest, social organizations and people's procuratorates are encouraged and supported to initiate public interest litigation, and it is stipulated that public interest litigation may apply for a deferral of the payment of appraisal fees and evaluators' appearance fees in court. In order to truly resolve the public's difficulties, it is provided that parties who meet the requirements for legal aid may apply for a suspension or reduction of the payment of evaluation fees and the fees for evaluators to appear in court.

At the same time, the provisions also make it clear that where an appraisal body or evaluator exceeds the scope of the appraisal, makes a false appraisal, delays the appraisal without a legitimate reason, refuses to appear in court to testify, collects fees in violation of regulations, or has other circumstances that violate laws and regulations, the people's court may, on the basis of the severity of the circumstances, suspend the entrustment of the appraisal body or evaluator and order a refund of the appraisal fees. In addition, the people's courts have established a blacklist system for evaluators, and where appraisal bodies or evaluators have the circumstances in the preceding paragraph, they may be entered into the blacklist of evaluators. During the period when evaluation bodies and evaluators are entered into the blacklist, they must not enter the people's courts' candidate lists of professional evaluation bodies or professionals and related information platforms.

The Supreme Court has made clear provisions on some issues that are not provided for in judicial practice but are anxious to solve, in which it is clear that the results of a polygraph test are not legal evidence in civil litigation and can only be used as a reference, and the people's court cannot entrust an appraisal of a polygraph in order to avoid using the results of a polygraph test as an appraisal opinion that may affect the authentication of the facts of the case and judicial fairness.

The results of the polygraph test cannot affect the final outcome of the case, he only serves as a reference and cannot be used as legal evidence to prove his innocence, and the people's court will not entrust an appraisal, because some of the examination checks are not strict, so as not to affect the impartiality of the judicial organs.

No. China's Supreme People's Procuratorate has announced that the results of the polygraph will not affect the determination and fairness of the case.

This will not determine the facts of the case, because the polygraph results are not a legal form of evidence and only serve as a reference.

The results of the polygraph will affect the determination of the facts of the case and judicial fairness, because the polygraph machine may not be able to correctly determine whether the liar's behavior is true, after all, the machine will also make mistakes.

Polygraph is actually to measure blood pressure, heartbeat and other physiological phenomena at any time during the interrogation of prisoners, but if the suspect's psychological quality is very good, then the polygraph is completely ineffective, but some people who have not committed a crime but have poor psychological quality will fail to take a polygraph.

Lie detectors, everyone should have seen it on TV or in movies. In the process of handling difficult cases, when the investigating organs dig three feet into the ground and cannot find evidence, it is very likely that they have to rely on this technical means. In fact, as early as the beginning of the 20th century, modern state polygraph technology had applications in the field of criminal investigation.

So, can the results of a polygraph be used as the basis for a verdict?

The reply of the Supreme People's Procuratorate on whether the conclusion of the CPS multi-channel psychological test can be used as evidence in litigation (Gao Jian Fa Yan Zi 1999 No. 12) pointed out:

This shows the basic stance and attitude of the judicial organs towards polygraphy: it can be used as an aid, but not as evidence.

In the 21st century, polygraph conclusions have begun to be used in civil and commercial trials

In fact, the academic community generally agrees with the opinion of the Supreme People's Procuratorate

Generally speaking, in civil and commercial cases, if both parties agree, an application to the court may be made using polygraph technology and may be tried based on the polygraph conclusion. However, in the field of criminal procedure, annihilation can only be used as a reference.

Reference: Wang Xinping. Application of Evidence and Practical Skills in Civil Litigation.

Article 63 of the Civil Loss Investigation and Litigation Law stipulates that the certificate of sale of the lease includes: (1) the statement of the party that is not blind. (2) Documentary evidence.

3) Physical evidence. (4) Audio-visual materials. (5) Electronic data.

6) Witness testimony. (7) Appraisal opinions. (8) Inquest records.

Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as a basis for determining facts.

Legal Analysis: In criminal cases, polygraphy cannot be used as a direct evidence chain to prove a crime, and according to the reply of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, polygraph is different from the appraisal conclusion in criminal proceedings, and does not belong to the type of evidence stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Law. When handling a case, polygraphs can be used to help judge evidence, but they cannot be used as evidence.

Legal basis: Article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China that can be used to prove the facts of a case is evidence. Evidence includes:

Evidence; documentary evidence; witness testimony; victim statements; confessions and justifications of criminal suspects and defendants; Appraisal opinions; Records of inquests, inspections, identifications, and investigative experiments; Audiovisual materials, electronic data. Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as the basis for a verdict.

Generally speaking, the polygraph is an auxiliary machine for investigation, which has nothing to do with the case itself, is not evidence, and its polygraph results cannot be used as evidence, but can only be used as a reference for investigation.

1. Whether a polygraph can be used as criminal evidence.

No, the procuratorate may use a polygraph to help review and judge evidence in handling a case, but it cannot use the polygraph evaluation conclusion as evidence. According to relevant laws and regulations, the main forms of evidence include documentary evidence, physical evidence, audio-visual materials, witness testimony, party statements, appraisal conclusions, and inquest records. Among them, the appraisal conclusion includes forensic identification, physical evidence identification and audio-visual data identification, excluding psychological testing.

2. In what manner is the crime of fraud used as evidence.

Fraud cases are usually based on transfer records, chat records, witness testimony, victim statements, etc. Buried.

According to article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Law, all materials that can be used to prove the facts of a case are 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, investigative experiments, and so forth;

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.

3. What evidence of nuclear harassment can be provided by extortion.

Where parties are extorted, the following evidence is generally required to prove: physical evidence; documentary evidence; witness testimony; victim statements; and audio-visual materials, electronic data and other evidence. As long as the materials that can prove the facts of the case are evidence collected by the victim or the investigating organ in accordance with law, and are verified to be true, they may be used as evidence.

Article 8 of the Specifications for Public Security Police Stations to Issue Certificates of Illegal and Criminal Records (Provisional) meets any of the following circumstances, and public security police substations may issue certificates of illegal and criminal records:

1) Political review of the recruitment of civil servants by state organs;

2) The Communist Party of China organizes the political review of the recruitment of new Party members;

3) The notary public shall handle the notarization of whether the citizen has a criminal record in accordance with the law;

4) Citizens engaging in occupations that laws, regulations, or rules provide must be premised on the absence of relevant illegal or criminal records;

5) Other situations where the public security organs at the provincial level or above find it truly necessary to issue proof of illegal or criminal records.

Legal basis

Article 63 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Evidence includes: 1) the parties' statements.

(2) Documentary evidence. 3) Physical evidence.

(4) Audio-visual materials.

(5) Electronic data.

6) Witness testimony.

(7) Appraisal opinions.

(8) Inquest records. Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as a basis for determining facts.

Li borrowed 20,000 yuan from Xiao Wang, but because there was no IOU, Li did not admit it afterwards. So, if Xiao Wang sues the court, can the court use a lie detector to test Li on polygraph? Can the results obtained by the polygraph be used as the basis for a court decision? Expert opinion.

A lie detector is a physiological measuring instrument. The use of a polygraph actually consists of two parts: the statement of the person concerned and the scientific identification of the person's physiological reaction. and evidence in civil proceedings.

It cannot be collected by coercion. The use of a polygraph for polygraph must be carried out with the consent of the person being tested for polygraph, and if the person does not consent to its use, the court cannot force the use against his will. Otherwise, it constitutes an infringement of personal rights.

According to 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 the prohibitive provisions of law cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of a case." "Evidence obtained by forcibly using a polygraph against the will of a party cannot be used as lawful evidence in a verdict.