论文部分内容阅读
在庭审问答中,公诉人通常使用预设策略询问证人,以获得对控方有利的推理。公诉人在使用一般疑问句、附加疑问句、信息疑问句和陈述疑问句时带有一定的预设,而预设是否成立取决于证人对含预设问话的回答。是否对公诉人问话中的预设进行确认,取决于公诉人问话的目的与证人的立场是否一致。当双方目的一致时,证人倾向于采取合作态度,承认问话中的预设;当双方目的冲突时,证人倾向于采取不合作态度,否认问话中的预设;当证人对公诉人的问话目的未知时,合作与否是未知的;当证人认为公诉人的问话目的为中性时,合作与否是个变量。
In court quizzes, prosecutors often use pre-set tactics to question witnesses to gain favorable reasoning about the prosecution. Prosecutors use certain general interrogative sentences, additional interrogative sentences, information interrogative sentences and interrogative interrogative sentences with certain presuppositions. Whether the presuppositions are established depends on the witness’s answer to the interrogated interrogation questions. Whether to confirm the presupposition in the public prosecutor’s question depends on whether the purpose of the public prosecutor’s question and the position of the witness are the same. When the purpose of both parties is the same, the witness tends to adopt a cooperative attitude and recognize the presupposition in the interview. When the purpose of both parties conflicts, the witness tends to adopt an uncooperative attitude and denies the presupposition in the interview. When the witness questions the prosecutor When the purpose is not known, the cooperation or not is unknown; when the witness thinks the public prosecutor’s questioning purpose is neutral, the cooperation or not is a variable.