Feasibility of the Application of Common Law Double Tier Model in China from the Burden of Proof Perspective

He CAI

Abstract


Since just cause and other behaviors that exclude social harmfulness are not included in constitution of a crime, the distribution of burden of proof is not clear. Behaviors that exclude social harmfulness is the content of the defense of just cause in British and American double tier model and the burden of proof is clear. We cannot introduce or borrow the British and American double tier model to clearly exclude the burden of proof of behaviors which have social harmfulness for it could lead to the increase of the accused’s burden of proof and therefore causes inability of proofing, the burden of proof of both the prosecuting and defending parties mixed and conflict, and no way for bearing the burden of proof for the accused.

Keywords


The constitution of a crime; Behaviors that exclude social harmfulness; Double tier model; Burden of proof

Full Text:

PDF

References


Li, L. Z. (2006). Studies on the theory of the constitution of crime. Beijing: Law Press China.

Gao, M. X., & Ma, K. C. (Eds.). (2011). Criminal law (5th ed.). Beijing: Peking University Press & Higher Education Press.

Ma, K. C. (1999). An introduction to crime. Wuhan: Wuhan University Press.

Robinson, P. H. (2005). The structure and function of criminal law (B. S. He & G. P. Wang, Trans.). Beijing: China Democracy and Law Press.

Chu, H. Z. (2005). American criminal law (3rd ed.). Beijing: Peking University Press.

Dressler, J. (2009). Understanding criminal law (X. M. Wang Trans.). Beijing: Peking University Press.

Liu, S. X. (2010). Elements of a crime. Beijing: People’s Publishing House.

Zhou, G. Q. (2011). General provisions of criminal law (2nd ed.). Beijing: China Renmin University Press.

Chen, X. L. (2001). Substantial criminal law. Beijing: Commercial Press.

Xu, J. C. (1999). Criminal procedure law. Beijing: Law Press China.

Herrmann, J. (1995). Germany criminal procedure code (C. K. Li, Trans.). Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press.

Yu, G. Z., & Wen, D. P. (2002). Comparison, reflection and remolding: On constitution of a crime. Law Review, (3).

Lai, Z. X. (2007). Discussion and enlightenment of common law criminal constitution elements. Studies in Law and Business, (4).

Husak, D. N. (1987). Philosophy of criminal law. New Jersey: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Reid, S. T. (2001). Criminal law (5th ed.). Ohio: McGraw-Hill.

Morse, S. J. (1985). Excusing the crazy: The insanity defense reconsidered. Southern California Law Review, March.

United States V. Johnson, 968 F.2nd 208, 208-216 (2d Cir. 1992).

Andrews, J. A., & Hirst, M. (1992). Criminal evidence. London: Sweet & Maxwell.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/j.css.1923669720130904.2572

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c)



Reminder

  • How to do online submission to another Journal?
  • If you have already registered in Journal A, then how can you submit another article to Journal B? It takes two steps to make it happen:

Submission Guidelines for Canadian Social Science

We are currently accepting submissions via email only. The registration and online submission functions have been disabled.

Please send your manuscripts to [email protected]，or [email protected] for consideration. We look forward to receiving your work.

 Articles published in Canadian Social Science are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).

 

Canadian Social Science Editorial Office

Address: 1020 Bouvier Street, Suite 400, Quebec City, Quebec, G2K 0K9, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138 
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org 
E-mail:[email protected]; [email protected]

Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture