The Supreme People's Procuratorate (SPP) has recently released eight typical cases of substantive review of technical evidence in injury-related cases.
These cases cover common types of injury cases and involve review of diverse content.
They emphasize distinguishing between recent and prior injuries based on the characteristics of the victim's injuries to ensure accurate determination of the facts; initiating re-evaluations where expert opinions are found to be problematic so as to ensure scientific and accurate conclusions; and conducting substantive review of technical evidence, such as audiovisual materials and expert opinions, to ascertain facts in cases lacking confessions to determine subjective intent.
In a case involving harm caused by deceiving or coercing others into long-term drug use, the importance of substantive review of technical evidence is underscored. In one case where multiple people were injured, substantive review of the technical evidence enabled effective determination of the mechanisms of injuries.
The released cases focus on addressing professional challenges. Some help improve the criminal evidence system, accurately determining subjective intent and the consequences of harm, thereby promoting accountability of offenders in accordance with the law. Others clarify the mechanisms of injuries, providing strong proof of causation and clearly distinguishing responsibility among suspects. In certain cases, the errors in original expert opinions were accurately identified so as to prompt supplementary investigations or re-evaluations to prevent wrongful convictions.
The SPP's Procuratorial Department for General Crimes stated that technical evidence in injury cases often involves specialized knowledge from fields such as information technology and biomedical sciences, which creates professional barriers. Prosecutors are encouraged to collaborate with technical experts during the substantive review of technical evidence. Where substantive judgments cannot be reached based solely on their own professional knowledge and logical reasoning, they should leverage the expertise of technical experts to solve complex issues. By conducting thorough substantive reviews of technical evidence, the aim is to clarify facts effectively, ensure accountability for those responsible for injuries, and achieve precise sentencing.
Furthermore, according to the department, continuous efforts will be made to enhance the professionalization and standardization of these reviews to ensure high-quality and efficient case handling and enhance judicial credibility.
