The new criminal procedure law revised in January 1, 2013 started the implementation of this law, based on studying the new criminal procedure law, the law is not clear place, for your reference.

   A, a witness.

   1, about the protection of witness, witness protection provisions about the new criminal procedure law will have difficulty in implementation, especially when it comes to witnesses, residential protection, the court itself certainly difficult, required by the public security organs specific implementation, hence the need to strengthen coordination between relevant, it did not do specific provisions, the specific implementation may occur when shuffle, disjointed, information is not smooth phenomenon.

   2, about the witness to testify in court.

   In practice, if the witness statements made in court and before the testimony is not consistent, and how to deal with? According to the practices of foreign court testimony, and before the testimony is not consistent, applicable in court testimony. Before the testimony, can be used as evidence to question the credibility of impeachment court statement. The new criminal procedure law after the implementation, is still applicable representation before the record, which greatly weakened the witness testifying significance. In relation to the judicial impartiality, authority. In this regard, the provisions of the new criminal law is quite general, practicability is poor, especially in the face of the huge liquidity old crimes and now staff, there is a big loophole, need to seriously study, the timely introduction of judicial interpretation norms.

   Two, about the expert assistant.

   "The expert assistant" is what is new in the criminal law, is a new formulation. Our lawyer friend should pay special attention to.

    1, the expert assistant: both parties invited expert opinions, suggestions of identification of the person. He is neither a witness, expert witness is not, but help both sides on expert opinion evidence the witness. Its responsibilities to question the identification with their own expertise, expression of opinion.

    2, the effect of auxiliary expert opinion.

    Auxiliary expert comments may not be objective and fair, the court should be careful evaluation of their opinions. Specific to the case by the court decision.

   Three, about the illegal evidence exclusion.

   1, illegal evidence exclusion looks nice, but there is "a little" phenomenon: the defendant's trial confession, lawyers question the legitimacy of evidence, the court on the legality of evidence investigation, ruled out the examples of small. For example: the existing legislation stipulates: "the interrogation should be" in the detention center, then in the outside questioned whether classified as "illegal interrogation", thus forming the confession should be excluded? In addition: the existing legislation does not about "audio-visual material", "electronic evidence" the existence of illegal evidence, rule, in practice, in case of any dispute, how to solve?

   2, the exclusion of illegal evidence in time.

    Because the existing legislation only stipulated in the pretrial conference on "the exclusion of illegal evidence" to understand the situation, listen to their views, but did not specify whether the pretrial preparation meeting to solve the "illegal evidence exclusion problem". So on the "exclusionary rule" the problem in time will be a problem: if no mention of the examination and approval of the parties before the court, whether in the first instance court premises? If a procedure not to mention, can carry out in the second instance?

   3, the police to testify in court.

   In the course of the exclusion of illegal evidence, police can testify in court is very important, if not the police to testify in court, then the system is difficult to play an effective role.

   Gong Dongliang lawyer: 18200599320  13909008496