On how the public prosecutor responds to the defendant's confession in court trial.

In the process of hearing a case in court, we often encounter the situation that the defendant recants his confession. How to deal with the defendant's confession retraction not only tests the prosecutor's ability to respond on the spot, but also tests the procuratorial organ's level of fair law enforcement and handling cases. Revenge in court refers to the situation in which the defendant overturns all or part of the previous confession about the facts of the case during the court trial, resulting in inconsistencies and contradictions in the contents of several confessions before and after, which is enough to affect conviction and sentencing. In view of the difficulty of the defendant's confession in the trial of public prosecution cases, the following countermeasures are put forward. First, pay attention to the defendant's confession. It is easy for the defendant to recant the facts of the previous case in order to reduce the punishment in the trial, or extort a confession by torture in the investigation stage, or commit a crime on his behalf. In this regard, the public prosecutor should face up to the significance of the defendant's confession in the Criminal Procedure Law and the Evidence Law, examine it fairly, and handle it correctly. The defendant's confession should not be regarded as a manifestation of the defendant's uncooperative and dishonest behavior, overcome his disgust and resistance, listen carefully to the defendant's excuses and statements, analyze the reasons, and study countermeasures, so as to truly achieve the goal of not wasting anything. Second, be prepared before appearing in court. In judicial practice, many cases are prosecuted mainly by verbal evidence, such as duty crimes, drug crimes and fraud crimes. The evidence of these cases is often one-to-one verbal evidence, and the amount of other relevant evidence is very small, which can not form a complete chain of evidence. Once the defendant withdraws his confession, it will have an impact on the whole evidence system, and the prosecutor will be passive if he does not handle it well in court. Generally speaking, the defendant will retract his confession during the trial, and will retract his confession at the stage of examination and prosecution. If the objection raised by the defendant during the examination and prosecution is not accepted, full preparations must be made before the trial. Third, deal with the specific situation. The public prosecutor should strictly base his trial on facts, take the law as the criterion, and be objective and fair. (1) The defendant's confession is extorted by torture or retracted in court, which is quite different from the criminal facts identified in the indictment, and there are new facts and evidence. If verbal evidence has a certain influence on the facts of the case and conviction and sentencing, the procuratorial organ shall examine and verify it based on the legal supervision function. According to the provisions of Article 265 of the Criminal Procedure Rules of the People's Procuratorate, if the examining and prosecuting department finds that investigators collect confessions of criminal suspects by illegal means during the examination, it shall put forward rectification opinions, and at the same time, it shall request the investigating organ to assign investigators to re-investigate and collect evidence. When necessary, the people's procuratorate may also investigate and collect evidence on its own. At this time, the public prosecutor should apply for an extension of the trial in court and conduct investigation and verification after the court. If the investigators do extort a confession by torture, they should exclude the defendant's confession as illegal evidence from the accusation evidence and refuse to accept it; If new evidence is found to confirm the facts of the case, the prosecution shall be changed. (2) If the defendant withdraws his confession in order to avoid or reduce the statutory punishment, if there are other evidences in this case, and the contents of these evidences directly point to the facts of the crime, the confession will basically not affect the determination of guilt. According to Article 46 of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), if the defendant has no confession and the evidence is really sufficient, the defendant can be found guilty and punished. In this case, the public prosecutor should use the contradiction between the defendant's confession and defense and other factual evidence, as well as the contradiction between the consistency and stability of the defendant's previous confession and the suddenness of his confession in court, seize the details, focus and common sense to refute, point out the falsehood of the defendant's confession in court, and effectively accuse the crime. (3) The defendant's confession of non-main facts will not affect the determination of the facts of the case, but generally only the main facts related to the constitutive elements of the crime, such as criminal behavior, harmful results, subjective intent, etc. , will affect the conviction; For unimportant facts such as the plot, means and time of the crime, if there are fundamental conflicts before and after the confession, and it is impossible to judge which confession is more credible by other evidence, the public prosecutor should choose the confession that is beneficial to the defendant and may lead to a lighter punishment. This is not only the need to carry out "no doubt" and protect the rights and interests of the defendant, but also the requirement of the standard of evidence in public prosecution. The defendant's confession mainly examines the legality of the evidence. In judicial practice, the defendant's confession is more complicated. In the process of trial, prosecutors need solid legal knowledge, keen thinking and flexible adaptability in order to truly enforce the law impartially.