Confession and the Crime Control Model: an Analysis of Exonerated Death Penalty Cases in China

IF 1.8 4区社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Asian Journal of Criminology Pub Date : 2022-10-25 DOI:10.1007/s11417-022-09383-6

Hong Lu, Honglan Shuai, Yudu Li, Jianhong Liu, Bin Liang

{"title":"Confession and the Crime Control Model: an Analysis of Exonerated Death Penalty Cases in China","authors":"Hong Lu, Honglan Shuai, Yudu Li, Jianhong Liu, Bin Liang","doi":"10.1007/s11417-022-09383-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h2>Abstract </h2><div><p>Confessions clearly have probative value when they are truthful. When not, however, they may lead to disastrous consequences. While the due process model provides procedural safeguards to ensure the voluntariness of a confession, under the crime control model, the reliability of a confession is the main emphasis, given its truth-finding priority. Two forces coexisted in China in the past three decades that warrant a close examination of the nature and goal of confessions: the impact of “strike-hard” campaigns and political pressure to swiftly crack down on serious crimes and the growing international pressure on human rights protections and China’s steady progress in improving procedural safeguards for the criminally accused. Citing 103 wrongfully convicted death penalty cases in China from 1983 to 2012, this study examines two inter-related questions regarding coerced confessions: (1) the extent and characteristics of confessions and torture, and (2) the goal of extracting confessions through torture. This analysis sheds light on the myth of the truth-finding goal under the crime control model and discusses policy implications of China’s current confession laws and death penalty reforms.</p></div></div>","PeriodicalId":45526,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Criminology","volume":"17 1","pages":"33 - 54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11417-022-09383-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11417-022-09383-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Confessions clearly have probative value when they are truthful. When not, however, they may lead to disastrous consequences. While the due process model provides procedural safeguards to ensure the voluntariness of a confession, under the crime control model, the reliability of a confession is the main emphasis, given its truth-finding priority. Two forces coexisted in China in the past three decades that warrant a close examination of the nature and goal of confessions: the impact of “strike-hard” campaigns and political pressure to swiftly crack down on serious crimes and the growing international pressure on human rights protections and China’s steady progress in improving procedural safeguards for the criminally accused. Citing 103 wrongfully convicted death penalty cases in China from 1983 to 2012, this study examines two inter-related questions regarding coerced confessions: (1) the extent and characteristics of confessions and torture, and (2) the goal of extracting confessions through torture. This analysis sheds light on the myth of the truth-finding goal under the crime control model and discusses policy implications of China’s current confession laws and death penalty reforms.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

认罪与犯罪控制模式:中国死刑无罪案例分析

摘要供词真实时，具有明显的证明价值。然而，如果不这样做，它们可能会导致灾难性的后果。正当程序模式为确保供词的自愿性提供了程序保障，而在犯罪控制模式下，供词的可靠性是主要重点，因为它具有查明真相的优先地位。过去三十年来，中国存在着两股力量，有必要对认罪的性质和目的进行仔细研究:一是“严打”运动的影响和要求迅速打击严重犯罪的政治压力;二是国际社会对人权保护日益增长的压力，以及中国在改善刑事被告人的程序保障方面取得的稳步进展。本文以1983 - 2012年中国103起死刑错判案件为例，探讨了刑讯逼供的两个相互关联的问题:(1)刑讯逼供的程度和特征;(2)刑讯逼供的目的。这一分析揭示了犯罪控制模式下寻找真相目标的神话，并讨论了中国现行认罪法和死刑改革的政策含义。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Asian Journal of Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

10.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Electronic submission now possible! Please see the Instructions for Authors. For general information about this new journal please contact the publisher at [welmoed.spahr@springer.com] The Asian Journal of Criminology aims to advance the study of criminology and criminal justice in Asia, to promote evidence-based public policy in crime prevention, and to promote comparative studies about crime and criminal justice. The Journal provides a platform for criminologists, policymakers, and practitioners and welcomes manuscripts relating to crime, crime prevention, criminal law, medico-legal topics and the administration of criminal justice in Asian countries. The Journal especially encourages theoretical and methodological papers with an emphasis on evidence-based, empirical research addressing crime in Asian contexts. It seeks to publish research arising from a broad variety of methodological traditions, including quantitative, qualitative, historical, and comparative methods. The Journal fosters a multi-disciplinary focus and welcomes manuscripts from a variety of disciplines, including criminology, criminal justice, law, sociology, psychology, forensic science, social work, urban studies, history, and geography.