Citation

Huijun X. Int. J. Evid. Proof 2017; 21(1-2): 143-157.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, SAGE Publications)

DOI

10.1177/1365712716674802

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Whether a death sentence is fair or not is an fundamental question for a country's criminal justice system, yet in practice, similar cases still occasionally receive differing judgments. In response to this problem, this paper has proposed to take sentencing evidence as the breakthrough for the balanced application of death penalty. This paper begins by analysing written judgments from 40 cases, which involve 69 individuals and have been sampled from all those archived under the Gazettes section by the Beidafabao,1 Peking University Centre for Legal Information. This analysis provides considerable insight into the type of sentencing evidence admitted in capital cases, as well as the impact that principal evidence has on where death sentences are imposed. Next, in accordance with the basic problems of evidence law, this paper separates out sentencing evidence of capital cases from conventional theories that confuse it with convictions. Taking sentencing evidence as the core, the objective of the empirical analysis and theoretical discussion is to establish guidelines as well as a policy analysis for capital cases in China in the future.

Language: en