tation of the federal rules of evidence，71 ind．l．j．551（1996）；andrew e．taslitz，interpretive method and the federal rules of evidence：a call for a politically realistic hermeneutics，32 harv．j．on legis．329（1995）；paul c．giannelli，interpreting the federal rules of evidence，15 cardozo l．rev．1999（1994）；edward j．imwinkelried，moving：beyond“top down”grand theories of statutory construction：a“bottom up”interpretive approach to the federal rules of evidence，75 or．l．rev．389（1996）；eileen a．scallen，andrew e．taslitz，reading the federal rules of evidence realistically：a response to professor imwinkelried．75 or．l．rev．429（1996）．
[58]“形式的和理性的两方面证据的刻板僵硬经常使得在刑事案件中确定定罪依据变得十分困难。正是由于这个原因而不是其他什么原因，最终导致了广泛地使用刑讯手段获取证据，尤其是证据之王——口供。”见伯尔曼著：《法律与革命》，1993年版，贺卫方、高鸿钧、张志铭、夏勇译，中国大百科全书出版社，第306页。
[59]mirjan damaska，of hearsay and its analogues，in 76 minn．l．rev．425—458．
[60]等级模式（hierarchical offficialdom）的司法官僚体制，是指司法官员往往由等级分明的专业法官组成，上下级之间的关系强调不平等的特征。职业化的官僚以及长时期的任职，均不可避免地导致专业化和程式化，而这些又导致司法官员划定一个他们认为属于他们的领域，并在处于相同情境中的人员内部发展出彼此之间自我认同的身份意识。逐渐地，“内部人”和“外部人”之间的区别变得严格化，从而“外部人”对程序的参与以及对程序决定的制作而言则变得无关紧要。mirjan damaska，faces of justice and state authority．yale university，new haven and london，1986，pp．18—23．
[61]“in addition，in states like new york and several others，the legislature controls the codification and the amendment process．given the popularity with voters of‘tough on crime’issues，criminal defense lawyers fear the politization of evidence law．they trust judges more than legislators．”faust f．rossi，the federal rules of evidence in retrospect：observations from the 1995 aals evidence section：the federal rules of evidence—past，present，and future：a twenty—year perspective，28 loy．l．a．l．rev．1271（1995）．
[62]james bradley thayer，a preliminary treatise on evidence at the common law，cite as evidence，augustus m．kelley．publishers，new york，1969．
[63]note，improper evidence in nonjury trials：basis for reversal 79 harv．l．rev．407（1965），p．407．
[64]“most of those rules——relating to relevance，hearsay，privilege，and so on——were calculated to exclude various kinds of testimony and tangible evidence from a lay jury’s consideration during its fact—finding deliberations．the notion underlying many，although not all，of these categorical negative rules was that jurors in a less sophisticated time were ill—equipped accurately to assess the relevance and reliability（the probative worth）of some classes of evidentiary material．jurors，it was speculated，might assign substant

上一页  [1] [2] [3] [4] 下一页