| In China, the method of corroboration, as a universal empirical rule, is not only established in law, but also applied universally by factfinders in practice. But in the theoretical circle, there are many ambiguities and misunderstandings about the concept, the theoretical basis, the necessity, and the preconditions of corroboration. There are even people who claim that "corroboration" can lead to misjudged criminal cases. In view of this situation, this paper attempts to clarify a series of misunderstandings surrounding "corroboration", respond to some typical criticisms, and defend "corroboration" as a method of proof from an interdisciplinary perspective. The connotation of "corroboration" is more than "consistency", less than "entailment", and equivalent to "fitting together'". The theoretical foundation of the method of "corroboration" is evidential holism and coherence as criterion of truth, rather than the coherence theory of truth and the correspondence theory of truth. In view of the cognitive characteristics of human beings, the method of "corroboration" is the necessary means for us to evaluate the evidence, and this is supported by the related results of philosophical, psychological and other researches. So, to some extent, the method of "corroboration" has the inevitability in the biological and psychological senses. It is also a universal method of proof, not unique to China. But the effective application of the method of "corroboration" depends on the satisfaction of its preconditions. Many of the so-called negative effects of the method is precisely the result of the failure to meet these preconditions, rather than inherent in the method itself. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号