性侵兒童案件之程序法研究-美國法之啟示__臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

論文基本資料
摘要
外文摘要
參考文獻

題名：	性侵兒童案件之程序法研究-美國法之啟示
作者：	張瑋心
校院名稱：	中央警察大學
系所名稱：	犯罪防治研究所
指導教授：	林輝煌、黃惠婷
學位類別：	博士
出版日期：	2014
主題關鍵詞：	性侵害；兒童被害人；合意性交；證述；傳聞法則例外
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:0 共同引用:0 點閱:37

2010年的白玫瑰運動，揭露我國法院長期對於兒童被害人之性侵害案件判刑過輕、無罪率偏高，不滿的聲浪重挫我國最高法院之威信，致使其裁判理由書受到嚴格檢視。事實上，我國針對性侵兒童罪與美國 Statutory Rape在構成要件上，存有若干差異，其中行為人的主觀意圖、被害人的合意與否、以及強制力使用之有無，均非美國法成立該罪之所問，而年齡差距之規範用以限制羅密歐與茱麗葉條款之適用，則更顯其特色。次就法定刑罰之部分，我國強制性交罪之條文規定，虞有混淆成人與兒童被害人兩者立法目的之缺失，單面側重婦女與兒少之性自主權，導致實務上法律適用之困難；對照下，美國各州刑法則明確強調國家保護兒童少年之立法決心，否認兒童合意性交之法律有效性，並對於觸犯本罪之成年男女一律祭出重典。易言美國法上的Statutory Rape，一律重罰成人與兒童性交行為，於實務上審理此類案件，就調查證據可能遭遇之困境，早有深刻體悟，故而承認兒童被害人之指述乃被告有罪與否的重要依據，並且創設若干兒童傳聞法則之例外。其法理不外性侵案件屬私密犯罪，兒童的語言特性若不先以承認，一旦拿掉兒童指述之部分，被告即難以被定罪。是美國審判實務操作以兒童最大利益為優先考量，傾向兒童語境（state of mind）下欠缺動機之表達為真實，由被告負較高舉證責任去說服陪審團。即兒童作為被害人和普通證人之證言可信性風險有別，非兒童語言一概有受成人誘導之危險，而此項平等保護之意旨於「國際兩公約」中被以清楚闡述。本文研究爰以我國法院裁判為例，探討若干無罪判決論理之疑義外，同時引介美國傳聞法則之例外，冀供我國未來修法及法院審理性侵兒童案件參考。

以文找文

There were several cases in Taiwan in which individuals convicted of sexually abusing children received what were widely considered to be excessively light sentences or a verdict of not-guilty. This led to the White Rose movement of 2010, whereby judgments were reviewed critically and found to be of absurd reasoning. In fact, the requirements to constitute a forcible rape of children in Taiwan is different from those of statutory rape in the United States. Among these requirements, the perpetrator’s mens rea, consent, or the use of threats, are irrelevant for use in a conviction; rather the victim’s age is the deciding factor in whether a penalty is imposed or waived under the so-called “Romeo and Juliet statute.” In addition, the statutory penalties of sexual abuse in Taiwan’s criminal law seem to confuse the legislative purpose of enforcing the law as it applies to children versus how it applies to adults in the context of sexual autonomy. This issue has led to difficulty in applying these statutes. By contrast, American law highlights the legislative determination of child protection by rejecting the notion of a child’s ability to provide consent to having sex, and the law implements severe penalties. The US has perhaps the most comprehensive safeguards against sex crimes, where the courts have seen numerous difficulties in discovering evidence and combating sex crimes against children in a meaningful way, for example in the case of child testimony and hearsay exceptions. Simple reasoning implies that sexual assault is in a secretive crime, and once a child victim's testimony is not allowed to be admitted, the defendant could be set free. American courts, thus, consider children's state of mind first, assuming a child victim's testimony under the absence of motive makes the accusation legitimate. Aside from any national law, International Human Rights Treaties come into effect within domestic law, in which Equal Protection is instated. This paper seeks to discover some Taiwanese case judgments based on inconvincible reasoning, and further aims to introduce how American hearsay exceptions can be used in trial for child victims in statutory rape for Taiwanese courts' reference.

以文找文

一、中文部分：
（一）書籍
王澤鑑，民法總則，三民書局，增訂版，2001年9月。
李慧瑜，性侵害案件兒童證人於刑事訴訟之相關法律問題－淺談美國法之理論與實
務，第47期學員法學研究報告，法務部司法官訓練所，2008年。
林輝煌，論證據排除－美國法之理論與實務，元照，2003年9月。
林錦芳，妨害性自主犯罪量刑分析研究小組期中報告，司法院，2011年4月19日。 new window

段重民譯，美國聯邦證據法，司法週刊，1985年6月。
張文軒譯，George Yule原著，語言學導論，書林，2000年9月。
張文新，兒童社會性發展，北京師範大學出版，1999年8月。
陳祐治，佛羅里達證據法逐條釋義，作者自印，2006年2月。
陳淑媛，對強姦類型犯罪-最高法院之證據評價及量刑分析之研究，司法院，1999年。
黃東熊，證據法綱要，中央警官學校編印，1980年9月。
蔡墩銘，刑事證據法論，五南，1997年12月。
（二）期刊論文
王兆鵬，自白與毒樹果實理論，月旦法學，第101期，2003年10月，99-114頁。
吳清妙，「戀童癖」之探討及防處之道-李宜俊性侵30名少年為例，刑事雙月刊，
2007年，7-8月號，31-37頁。
李震山，身體不受傷害權，法學講座，第25期，2004年1月，1-25頁。
李建璋，兒童性侵害評估，台灣醫界，第54期，2011年，11-14頁。
李念祖，國家人權報告國際審查撮要，台灣人權學刊，第2卷第1期，2013年6月， new window

133-140頁。
張瑋心，論訊問句式中言語邏輯之應用，警學叢刊，第40卷第2期，2009年9月， new window

189-206頁。
張瑋心，論性侵案件「兒童被害人證言可信性」之檢驗，司法新聲，第102期，2012年，
71-88頁。
張瑋心，論台、美處罰「對兒童少年性交」之刑罰差異，警學叢刊，第44卷第4期，
2014年2月，117-148頁。
陳慈幸、陳毓琪，從戀童症與家庭系統理論論日本新潟少女囚禁案件，亞洲家庭暴力 new window

與性侵害期刊，第4卷第2期，2008年，48-63頁。
陳志龍，酒不罪人，人自罪－妨害性自主罪之探論，月旦法學雜誌，第75期，12-13頁。
彭南元，兒童性侵害案件中兒童證人及專家鑑定之研究，律師雜誌，第253期，
2000年10月，38-56頁。
劉邦繡，性侵害犯罪防治法之性侵害犯罪新解－以一九九九年修正之刑法妨害性自主
罪、妨害風化罪為論述，律師雜誌，第267期，2001年12月，86-118頁。
（三）學位論文
王純逸，我國刑事法少年法定年齡規定之解析，臺北大學法律學系碩士論文，
2009年7月。
卓俊源，刑事證據關聯性及其限制-以美國聯邦證據法為中心，國防大學管理學院法律
研究所碩士論文，2000年6月。
季凱群，準備程序之證據調查，東海大學法律研究所碩士論文，2006年7月。
林志潔，證言之證據能力與證明力-以誤判防止與人權保障為中心，國立台灣大學法律
研究所碩士論文，2000年6月。
洪銘憲，論我國刑法強制性交罪之發展，國立中正大學法律學系研究所碩士論文，
2006年6月。
張清埤，我國傳聞法則之理論與實務，海洋大學海洋法律研究所碩士論文，2009年5月。
許潔怡，刑事訴訟程序中兒童證言之研究－以證言可信度為中心，國立成功大學法律學
研究所碩士論文，2008年1月。
錢明婉，貞操權之法律觀-兼論民法第一九五條之修正，國立中興大學法律研究所碩士
論文， 1998年7月。
顧正德，證據排除法則之理論與實務，東吳大學法學院法律學系碩士班碩士論文，
2005年8月。

二、外文部分：
（一）書籍
Asaph Glosser et al. (2004), Statutory Rape: A Guide to State Laws and Reporting
Requirements, The Lewin Publications.
Bolen, R. M. (2001), Child Sexual Abuse: Its Scope And Our Failure, New York: Kluwer
Academic.
Canada, Department of Justice (2004), A Handbook for Police and Crown Prosecutors on
Criminal Harassment, Ottawa.
Davis, Noy S. & Twombly, J. (2000), State Legislators’ Handbook for Statutory Rape
Issues, American Bar Association, OVC.
Deitch, M., et.al. (2009), From Time Out to Hard Time: Young Children in the Adult
Criminal Justice System, Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin, LBJ School
of Public Affairs.
Eberle, P. & Eberle, S. (1986), The Politics of Child Abuse, Lyle Stuart, Inc.
ECOSCO Resolution (2005), Guidelines on Justice in Matters involving Child Victims and
Witnesses of Crime, The Economic and Social Council.
Farb, Robert L. (2004), North Carolina Capital Case Law Handbook, 2nd ed., UNC School of Government.
Farb, Robert L. (2007), North Carolina Prosecutors’ Trial Manual, 4th ed., UNC-CH School of Government.
Goleman, D. (1985), Vital Lies, Simple Truths - The Psychology of Self-Deception,
Touchstone.

Israel, Jerold H. (2008), Criminal Procedure and the Constitution: Leading Supreme Court
Cases and Introductory Text., St. Paul, MN: Thomson/West.
Josephson, Michael S. (1982), Criminal Law, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles.
Kohlberg, L. (1981), Essays on Moral Development: The Philosophy of Moral Development,
San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers.
Kohlberg, L. (1984), Essays on moral development: The psychology of moral development, the nature and validity of moral stages, 2nd ed., San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers.
LexisNexis Group (2010), Criminal Jury Instructions for the District of Columbia, Matthew
Bender & Company, Inc.
Lyon, T.D. (2002), Scientific Support for Expert Testimony on Child Sexual Abuse
Accommodation, in J.R. Conte (Ed.), Critical Issues In Child Sexual Abuse, Newbury
Park, CA : Sage.
Salter, A. C. (2003), Predators: Pedophiles, Rapists And Other Sex Offenders: Who They Are,
How They Operate, And How We Can Protect Ourselves And Our Children, New York:
Basic Books.
UNODC, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2009), Handbook for Professionals and Policymakers on Justice Matters involving Child Victims and Witnesses of Crime.
U.S. Department of Justice (1998), United States Attorney's Office, District of Columbia., Child Victims And Witnesses: A Handbook for Criminal Justice Professionals, Revised.
Vrij, A. (2002), Deception in Children: A Literature Review and Implications for Children’s
Testimony., in H.L. Westcott , G. M. Davis, & R.H.C. Bull Eds. Children’s Testimony,
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
（二）期刊論文
Adams, J. A. et al. (1994), Examination findings in legally confirmed child sexual abuse: It's normal to be normal, Pediatrics, 94(3): 310-317.
Berliner, L., & Conte, J. R. (1995), The effects of disclosure and intervention on sexually
abused children, Child Abuse & Neglect, 19: 371-384.
Bruck, M. et al. (1998), Reliability and credibility of young children’s reports: from research to policy and practice, American Psychology, 53: 136-151.
Bussey, K. (1999), Children’s categorization and evaluation of different types of lies and
truths, Child Development, 70(6): 1338-1347.
Conte, J. R. et al. (1989), What sexual offenders tell us about prevention strategies,
Child Abuse & Neglect, 13: 293-301.
Elliott, M. et al. (1995), Child sexual abuse prevention: What offenders tell us, Child Abuse & Neglect, 19: 579-594.
Everson, M.D., & Boat, B. W. (1989), False allegations of sexual abuse by children and
adolescents, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
28: 230-235.
Finkelhor, D., & Dziuba-Leatherman, J. (1994), Children as victims of violence: A national
survey, Pediatrics, 94 (4): 413-420.
Gervais, J. et al. (2000), Children’s persistent lying, gender differences, and disruptive behaviours: A longitudinal perspective, International Journal of Behavioural Development, 24(2): 213-221.
Hanson, R. F. et al. (1999), Factors related to the reporting of childhood rape, Child Abuse & Neglect, 23: 559-569.
Heger, A. et al. (2002), Children referred for possible sexual abuse: Medical findings in 2384 children, Child Abuse & Neglect, 26: 645-659.
Hunter, J. A. et al. (1992), Attributions of blame in child sexual abuse victims: An analysis of age and gender influences, Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 1: 75-89. new window

Jones, D. P., & McGraw, J. M. (1987), Reliable and fictitious accounts of sexual abuse
to children, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2: 27-45.
Karp, David J. (1978), Coker v. Georgia: Disproportionate punishment and the death penalty
for rape, Columbia L. Rev. 78: 1714-1730.
Lawson, L., & Chaffin, M. (1992), False negatives in sexual abuse disclosure interviews,
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 7(4): 532-542.
Leichtman, M. D. & Ceci, S. J. (1995), The effects of stereotypes and suggestions on
preschoolers’ reports, Developmental Psychology, 31: 568-578.
Lipovsky, J. & Stem, P. (1997), Preparing children for court: An interdisciplinary view,
Child Maltreatment, Sage Publications, 2(2): 150-163.
Lyon, T. D. (1999), The new wave in children’s suggestibility research: A critique, Cornell
Law Review, 84: 1004-1087.
Lyon, T.D. (2001), Let's not exaggerate the suggestibility of children, Court Review,
38(3): 12-41.
Maldonado, J. L. (1998), Panel: childhood sexual theories and childhood sexuality,
International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 79: 148-151.
Malloy, L.C. et al. (2007), Filial dependency and recantation of child sexual abuse allegations, Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 46: 162-170.
Mun, A. H. (1991), Mandatory life sentence without parole found constitutionally permissible for cocaine possession, Wash. Law Review, 67: 713-717.
Nurcombe, B. (1986), The child as witness: competency and credibility, Journal of the
Academy of Child Psychiatry, 25(4): 473-480.
Oates, R. K. et al. (2000), Erroneous concerns about child sexual abuse, Child Abuse &
Neglect, 24: 149-157.
Oberman, M. (2000). Regulating consensual sex with minors: defining a role for statutory
rape, Buffalo Law Review, 48: 703-784.
Pipe, M. E., & Goodman, G. S. (1991), Elements of secrecy: Implications for children's
testimony, Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 9: 33-41.
Saywitz, K. J. et al. (1991), Children's memories of a physical examination involving genital touch: implications for reports of child sexual abuse, Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 59: 682–691.
Sjoberg, R. L., & Lindblad, F. (2002), Limited disclosure of sexual abuse in children whose
experiences were documented by videotape, American Journal of Psychiatry, 159(2):
312-314.
Smith, D. W. et al., (2000), Delay in disclosure of childhood rape: Results from a national
survey, Child Abuse & Neglect, 24: 273-287.
Walker, N. E. (2002), Forensic interviews of children: The components of scientific validity
and legal Admissibility, Law And Contemporary Problems, 65: 149-180.
Watkins, B. & Bentovim, A. (1992), The sexual abuse of male children and adolescents: A
review of current research, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 33:197-248.
三、網路資源
中華人權網站，http://www.cahr.org.tw/about.php，擷取日期：2012年2月27日。
內政部兒童福利網站，http://www.cbi.gov.tw/CBI_2/internet/main/doc/doc_detail.aspx?uid=
119&docid=1595，擷取日期：2012年2月27日。

Louis Kiefer, Defense considerations in the child as witness in allegations of sexual abuse, part i. witnesses in general: How we measure credibility, http://www.ipt-forensics.com/
journal/volume1/j1_1_1.htm#en3r, visited on Aug, 10, 2011.
The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/washington/26scotuscnd.html?
pagewanted =2. visited on July 30, 2011.

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	性侵害案件專責小組績效影響因素之研究
2.	臺灣推動性侵害司法詢問員制度之現況與展望
3.	兒童被害人兼證人之司法權利--聯合國文件之啟思
4.	引介美國司法實務就性侵害兒童案件之「傳聞法則之例外」
5.	國家人權報告國際審查撮要
6.	妨害性自主罪量刑分析研究
7.	論訊問句式中言語邏輯之應用
8.	從戀童症與家庭系統理論論日本新潟少女囚禁案件

1.	司法詢問員制度應用於兒童性侵害案件之實證研究

無相關書籍

無相關著作

無相關點閱

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫