医疗事故罪中鉴定意见审查判断问题研究OA

In the medical malpractice crime,appraisal opinions,which are widely used as scientific evidence,play a pivotal role in the determination of facts such as the constitutive elements of the crime.However,in judicial practice,the current mechanism for reviewing appraisal opinions tends to be formalized and passive.The theoretical differences in identifying"seriously irresponsible"and the substantive review of scientific issues have become two major problems in the review of appraisal opinions,and the review of different types of appraisal opinions also lacks a differentiation mechanism.By increasing the responsibility of investigation and prosecution organs for preliminary review,strengthening the substantive review in the trial stage from the perspectives of review standards,professionals,and identification models,and distinguishing between various types of appraisal opinions on the basis of the"dualistic"appraisal mechanism in the medical malpractice crime,it is possible to effectively break through the existing dilemma of reviewing appraisal opinions in this area.