論冤案之成因及救濟

The Causes and Remedies of Wrongful Conviction

蘇品蓁(Pin-Chen Su)

指導教授 ： 王皇玉

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/科際整合法律學研究所/碩士(2015年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2015.01238

摘要

無辜者計畫發起於1992年。該計畫致力於救援美國境內以DNA科學證據得以證明為真實無辜之被告。截至目前已救援了約300餘名無辜被定罪之被告。回顧我國，近年來台灣冤案事件屢傳不鮮。在冤獄平反協會成立以前，僅以民間司法改革基金會為主要救援無辜被告的民間非營利組織。而於民國102年冤獄平反協會始在台大教授以及多位熱心公益的律師倡議下成立。至此，台灣在冤案的研究以及資源投注上才正方興未艾。反觀，美國的以成功救援的個案因為數眾多，研究資源豐富，目前已經點出系統性地造成冤案之制度性因素，包含：證人指認錯誤、鑑識科學錯誤、錯誤自白、無效辯護等。然而美國和台灣刑事司法制度大相逕庭，因此本文希冀在可能的共同點上，找尋台灣刑事司法制度中本土化的冤案發生原因是本研究的主要目標。
　　從美國的文獻出發，指認錯誤是眾最多冤案的共同成因，且社會科學家指出美國實務上使用的門山法則並無法成為把關錯誤指認的有利判准。鑑識科學錯誤包含兩種類型－無效的科學以及錯誤的鑑定報告。錯誤自白的研究則指出真實無辜者亦可能因為程序利益上的考量而做出不實自白，有些時候甚至涉及偵查機關之不當行為導致錯誤自白。
　　本土研究方面，本文先定義研究範圍為目前已經藉由再審程序平反之案件，包含蘇建和案、江國慶案、陳龍綺案，以該些案件中之歷審判決書以及案件相關文本資料進行研究，輔以第二章討論的美國冤案成因，試圖歸納我國本土之冤案發生原因，最後從整理目前台灣冤案的成因中提出改革建議。
　　最後本文以再審法制於民國104年新修法為基礎，探討過去再審法制問題以及目前再審修法中的遺珠之憾，並提出非常救濟外的建議之度，以英國以及北卡無辜者委員會的立法例做為我國未來可能彌補再審法制不足之處的解套，期許能對我國冤案救援路徑提供新方向的思考。

關鍵字

冤案、誤判、再審、無辜者委員會、無辜者計畫

並列摘要

Innocence Project started in 1992 in America. It is devoted to save the innocence from wrongful convictions with DNA retest in the US. Until now, it has saved more than 300 innocence. Many wrongful convictions happens in Taiwan, too, but before Taiwan Association for Innocence founded, Judicial Reform Foundation was the one of the few NGO aiming at saving the innocence. In 2013, Taiwan Association for Innocence was founded thanks to the professor of NTU and some endeavored lawyers, and since then, researches and resources for saving the innocence started to grow. For the US, they research on the cases that had been proved wrongfully convicted, and point out the systematical causes of wrongful convictions, which are eyewitness misidentification, unvalidated or improper forensic science, false confessions or admissions, informants……Although, we share different judicial systems, this thesis tries to seek for the common and looks for the causes of wrongful conviction of Taiwan.
The thesis begin with eyewitness misidentification which is the most common causes for wrongful convictions. Some social scientists point out that Manson Rule is not the powerful standard for wrongful identification. Meanwhile, the concept of improper forensic science contains two sub-issues, which are junk science and improper forensic testimony. Researches about false confessions or admissions point out that the innocence might confess because the consideration of procedural benefits. Some of the false confessions is also due to misconducts of the polices or prosecutors.
The thesis defines the research object as the convictions that has been overturned in retrial, and choses three cases to be the closer-look objects: the case of Su Chien-ho, the case of Jiang Guo-Qing, the case of Chen Long-Qi. The thesis analyzes the judgements and the related judicial papers to find the causes of wrongful convictions of Taiwan, and tries to compare those causes to those of the America’s. In the end the thesis provides some reform advices for criminal judicial system of Taiwan.
The last chapter is based on the legislation amendment of the procedures of retrial in 2015. Through reviewing the legislation of retrial before the amendment and finding the important aspect of retrial that has not been legislated, the thesis introduces anther options that called innocence commissions. Taking Criminal Case Review Commission and North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission for example, the thesis hope to provide the new and powerful way to strengthen the remedies of wrongful convictions.

並列關鍵字

Innocence ； Wrongful Conviction ； Innocence Commission ； Innocence Project

參考文獻

5. 王泰升（2014），《台灣日治時期的法律改革》，臺北：聯經。

6. 王泰升（2006），《台灣法律史的建立》，臺北：王泰升。

10. 林鈺雄（2010），《刑事訴訟法(上)》，台北：元照。

11. 林鈺雄（2013），《刑事訴訟法(下)》，台北：元照。

4. 洪郁雅（2013），《建構我國獨立鑑識機關》，頁10，台灣大學科際整合法律學研究所碩士論文。