证据法课前英语阅读资料

.0证据法课前阅读资料Pro.RonaldAllen（4月19日至4月22日）证据法课前阅读资料...................................................................................................................................0Pro.RonaldAllen..........................................................................................................................................................0（4月19日至4月22日）...............................................................................................................................................04月19日第二章全部(原文91-138).......................................................................................................................0CHAPTERTWO.................................................................................................................................................0JURORDECISION-MAKING.....................................................................................................................33Attribute.......................................................................................................................................................334月20日原文第一章（pp.1-90）.....................................................................................................................38CHAPTERONE...........................................................................................................................................394月21日ChapterThreeRelevancy,ProbativeValue,andtheRule403Dangers(原文139-174)................143缺PP.157—174页的电子稿(第三章第二节证明力与规则403危险,)................................................1624月19日第二章全部(原文91-138)CHAPTERTWO_____________________THEPROCESSOFPROOF:HOWTRIALSARESTRUCTUREDAsyoubeginyourstudyofthelawofevidence,itcanbeusefultoputyourselfintheroleofthetriallawyertryingtopresentacasepersuasivelytothejury.Thisnecessarilyrequiresyoutoimagineatthesametimehowthetrialprocessappearstothejurors.Itisabewilderingmixtureofthefamiliarandtheunfamiliar.Tobeginwith,mostlitigatedeventsinvolveconventionalhumanaffairs.AlthoughtheprisonsettingintheJohnsoncaseisoutsidethepersonalexperienceofmostpeople,thecrucialquestionfordecisionissimplyhowafightcameabout,whichreduces,asistypical,tothequestionofwhomtobelieve--here,theinmateortheguards.Althoughtheissuesthattypifylitigationareusuallywithingeneralexperience,thedecision-makingmethodologydiffersradicallyfromthemannerinwhichanordinarycitizenmakesday-to-daydecisions.Thetrialsettingisunusual,perhapsonoccasionmystifying,andoftenintimidatingforjurors.Indeed,athemerunningthroughthetrialprocessthatyoumayhavealreadydetectedistheinsulationofthejuryfrommuchofwhathappensduringtrial.Although,historically,jurieswereallowedtodecideissuesoflawaswellasfactBevenaslateastheendofthe19thcenturyintheU.S.Bthemodernjurydecidesonlyfactualissues.Therefore,virtuallyalllegaldiscussionBincludingthepropersubstantiveandprocedurallawtobeappliedtothecase,andwhetherevidenceshouldbeadmittedorexcludedBoccursoutsidethehearingorpresenceofthejury.Relativelybrieflegaldiscussionsinthemidstoftrialmaybeconductedinasidebarconference,inwhichthelawyersandjudgetalkinlowvoicessonottobeheardbythejurors.Longerdiscussionsareheldeitherinthejudge=schambers,or,ifinthecourtroom,attimeswhenjurorsarenotpresent.Thisthemeofjuryinsulationalsorunsthroughtheevidencecourse,because,toalarge.1degree,therulesofevidencefocusdirectlyonthequestionofwhatevidencethejurywillbeallowedtohear.Thepolicyimplicationsofmostevidencerulesarethereforebasedonsomeone=sanswertothequestion:whatistheeffectonthefairresolutionofdisputesofallowingajurytoconsiderthistypeofinformation?A.THEADVERSARYSYSTEMTherulesstructuringlitigation,includingtherulesofevidence,arederivedfrom,andimplement,thedominanttheoryofdisputeresolutioninthiscountry,knownastheadversarysystem.Adversepartieseachpresentaself-servingversionofthetruthtoapresumablydisinterestedfactfinder,judgeorjury,whichhearstheevidencethepartiespresentanddecidesinadisinterestedfashionwhatactuallyhappened,andthuswhatverdictisappropriate.Theadversarialprocess,inturn,isderivedfromaconceptionoftheappropriateroleofgovernmentintheresolutionofdisputesbetweenprivateindividualsandbetweenthestateandanindividual.Thegovernmenthastheobligationtoprovideafairanddisinterestedforumfortheimpartialresolutionofdisputes;andforthemostpartthatisallthegovernmenthasanobligation,oraright,todo.Evenincriminalcases,thecourtsstandapartfromtheprosecution,treatingtherepresentativesofthesovereignasthoughtheywererepresentingaprivateparty.Thepartiesareresponsibleforinvestigatingthecase,preparingthecasefortrial,andinlargemeasurecontrollingthepresentationofevidenceattrial.Inthiscountry,manybelievethatadversarialinvestigationandpresentationofevidenceismorelikelytoyieldaverdictconsistentwiththetruththanisaprocessmoredominatedbyatribunal.Thisconceptionoftheroleofthegovernmentintheresolutionofdisputesisnotuniversallyshared.IntheAinquisitorial@systemsofmanyWesternEuropeancountriesdisputesarenotprivatematterstotheextentthattheyareintheUnitedStates,andtheadjudicativetribunalofteninvolvesitselfactivelyi