英文摘要 |
Just as the occurrence of aviation and medical accidents will lead to catastrophic consequences, the criminal justice system will also pay a heavy price once a wrongful conviction occurs, but few studies focus on the systematic warnings reflected by the near miss case. This thesis takes the near miss cases of “almost went wrong” to explore how a number of factors that lead to the occurrence of wrongful conviction cases interact with each other in the court trial process when a system error occurs— wrongful conviction cases and near miss cases, which together constitute the logic of causes of wrongful conviction? This thesis selects misdemeanor cases that are different from the existing discussions, uses the "Boolean-based Qualitative Comparison Approach" proposed by Ragin, compares 24 near miss cases and 9 wrongful conviction cases, and uses a two-stage design to explore the key reasons for the wrong path. This thesis has identified five major factors that may cause wrongful conviction cases in Taiwan: "stress reducing and diversion procedures", "defendant’s false guilty statement", "reliance on scientific or technological evidence", "misbelief in the Identification statement", "defendant’s criminal record or risky behavior", as the input value of the Boolean calculation. In the first stage, the guilty verdicts of the first instance between the near miss cases were compared, and three logical types of wrongful conviction cases were concluded after calculation: "misunderstanding confession type", "misidentifying difficult to refute type", "bad impression type", and analysis the interaction process between of different wrongful conviction factors. After comparing near miss cases and wrongful conviction cases in the second stage, this thesis finds that the key factors that lead the judgment result to go astray are "undetected defects under stress reducing and diversion procedures ", "mistrust witnesses’ confident statements based on scientific and technological detecting information" and "risky behavior of unfulfilling the responsibility of keeping property”, reflecting the biased decision of criminal trials on memory, technology, and predictive ability. The above-mentioned research results based on the types of property crimes that ordinary people may encounter are the risks of wrongful conviction cases that may be encountered in daily life, and the opportunities for overturning cases of near miss cases obtained through comparison are sufficient to the important advice for reforming the criminal justice system. |