刑事诉讼证明中程序证明标准是一个新概念，该概念与实体证明标准并列。
The procedural standard of proof is a new concept in the criminal procedure, and both of the procedural standard of proof and the substantive standard of proof are all important.
刑事诉讼证明标准，可分为客观证明标准和主观证明标准、多元化的证明标准和一元化的证明标准。
Proof standards in the criminal procedure can be classified into objective proof standards and subjective proof standards, diversified proof standards and centralized proof standards.
文章简要阐述了刑事诉讼证明标准的特征，对各种有代表性的观点进行了评析，并提出了实体真实的证明标。
By comparing and analyzing some views on this subject, author provides a new idea that substantive truth should be the standard of proof in the criminal procedure.
全文分为五个部分：第一章，介绍了刑事诉讼证明标准的概念及内涵，并对其和相邻范畴之间作了比较分析。
The full text is divided into five parts. The first chapter introduces the conception and connotation of criminal procedural testification standard, and compares it with similar categories.
证明标准是逮捕条件中的核心问题，但我国的刑事诉讼法及相关司法解释均未对这一问题作出明确的界定。
Standard of testification is a core problem in arrestment conditions. However in our country's criminal procedure law and relevant judicial interpretations, this problem is not clearly defined.
证明标准问题，一直以来是刑事诉讼中的热点与难点，这方面，学界展开过激烈的争论，最后仍未达成一致的共识。
Prove standards have been the highlights and difficulties in criminal procedure theories. Academic circles have been discussing them for a long time, but no agreements have been made any more.
在刑事诉讼中，刑事推定是认定案件事实的一种重要方法，在某种程度上减轻了控方证明的难度。
During the criminal procedure, criminal presumption is an important method in identifying the case, which to some extent mitigates the difficulty of Public Prosecutor's proof.
刑事证明主体是指在刑事诉讼的法庭审理中，依照法律规定的程序向审判机关提出证据，运用证据阐明系争事实、论证诉讼主张的活动的国家公诉机关和诉讼当事人。
The criminal subject of proof is public prosecutor and litigants who based on the procedures required by laws, offer evidence and use it to prove contentious facts and further propositions.
刑法第306条规定的辩护人伪证罪对刑事诉讼基本结构、回避制度和证明规则造成了很大冲击，使辩护人和所有受刑事追诉者的正当权利受到威胁，同时也是对辩护权的侵蚀。
The article 306 of criminal law on crime of perjury by defender has made a great impact on the basic structure of criminal procedure, the challenge system and the certification rules.
程序性证明贯穿于刑事诉讼整个过程，承担证明责任的控方或辩方随着诉讼阶段的不同，表现为不同的主体。
The procedural testifying run through all criminal litigations, in different stage of litigation, the defend or prosecution who undertake the burden of proof will represent in different subject.
最后指出了在我国现阶段的刑事诉讼中，不能仿效西方国家，要求在口供的合法性证明中要求被告人承担提供证据的责任。
At last, Can not follow the Western countries, ask the defendant to bear the burden of proof, at the present stage of criminal proceedings, in the procedure of proving confession legitimacy.
本文就非法证据的含义、范围、证明力以及非法证据排除规则的例外作了阐述，在此基础上提出了我国刑事诉讼法应当确立非法证据排除规则的构想。
On the basis of them, it puts forward that we should establish the idea of exclusive rule of illegal evidence in the criminal procedure law of China.
在刑事诉讼中，由于诉讼阶段不同，认识的层次和阶段任务有所差异，这就决定了在不同的刑事诉讼阶段应适用不同的证明标准；
Because there are different stages in the criminal procedure and each stage has its own tasks, the standard of proof should also be of vareties.
虽然我国刑事诉讼法明确了刑事诉讼的证明标准，但是在实践中仍存在诸多问题，不好操作。
Though has defined the identification standard of criminal suit in criminal procedure law of our country, but a great deal of problems still exist in practice, not easy to operate.
证明标准是贯穿整个证明过程始终的一根金线，是刑事诉讼的基础和核心，侦查人员必须将以证据为核心的侦查观念贯穿于整个侦查过程。
The standard of proof throughout the entire certification process is always the one golden thread, and is the basis and the core for criminal proceedings.
我国刑事诉讼法关于证明标准的规定仍欠完善，传统的证明标准理论也存在诸多不足。论文从诉讼规律出发，结合各国相关的法律规定，探讨了我国刑事证明标准体系的完善问题。
The regulations on testification standard in China's Criminal Procedural Law is not perfect, and there are also many shortcomings in the theory of traditional standards of testification.
我国刑事诉讼法关于证明标准的规定仍欠完善，传统的证明标准理论也存在诸多不足。论文从诉讼规律出发，结合各国相关的法律规定，探讨了我国刑事证明标准体系的完善问题。
The regulations on testification standard in China's Criminal Procedural Law is not perfect, and there are also many shortcomings in the theory of traditional standards of testification.
应用推荐