首页 理论教育 世界各国的司法警示与意义重构

世界各国的司法警示与意义重构

时间:2022-04-07 理论教育 版权反馈
【摘要】:很多欧美国家,如英国、澳大利亚、加拿大等国的警察告知都是在美国的米兰达警告的基础上发展起来的,其内容基本与美国的米兰达权利相似。

很多欧美国家,如英国、澳大利亚、加拿大等国的警察告知都是在美国的米兰达警告的基础上发展起来的,其内容基本与美国的米兰达权利相似。尽管各国司法警示在表述方式上稍有差异,但都存在类似的问题:在司法意义的表达与沟通时,没有体现警示交际的动态性特点,没能成功建构“以受众为中心”的警示意义。

8.2.1 英国警察告知中表意的含混性

英国的警察告知(police caution)分口头与书面两种形式,虽经历了不断修订的过程,但总的来说,基本上重在解决文本意义的可理解性,尚没有根据表达模态的差异性进行不同的形式建构,也没有突破单向性表意的内在缺陷。

为了保证交际效果,警察告知从最初的22个单词改写并扩展到37个单词。

(7)第一版,1991年版本,共22个单词

You do not have to say anything unless you wish to do so,but what you say may be given in evidence。

如果你不想说,你不用说任何话,但你所说的将被用作证据。

(8)第二版,现有版本,共37个单词

You do not have to say anything,but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court.Anything you do say may be given in evidence.

你不必说任何话,但如果在警察询问时候你没有陈述的东西,而你在案件随后的审理中又用这些陈述作证据的话,你现在不回答将影响到你的辩护。你所说的任何东西都将用作证据。

第二版在第一版的基础上扩展了单词,增加了“it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court”,并变动了“anything”(一切)这个名词。对比(7)(8)两个版本,现有版本尽管在句法与词汇上已经做了很多改善,但在专业语言学研究者看来,仍然存在不少问题。Shuy(1997)指出,具体词汇的意义仍不明显,比如,“harm your defense”既可理解为影响案件的审理与结果,也可理解为影响陪审员对被告的可信度判断,这两种理解到底是哪种,现有版本中存在混淆之处。Cotterill(2000)曾调查了近百名承担向嫌疑人告知其合法权利的司法人员,发现他们对该告知体系的词义理解各不相同,大部分人(约74%)甚至把“caution”解释为“威胁性的警告”,而只有一小部分人认为是“建议”(p.14)。对司法人员所采用的具体沟通方式进行调查发现,大部分司法人员仅仅用一般疑问句去检查被询问人是否明确理解“警察告知”的内容,对此,Cotterill(2000)指出,在确认嫌疑人对此权利的理解程度时,绝不能仅仅靠一个“是”或“否”来回答,而是需要更精细、专业的交际沟通知识与技能,比如应该从被询问人的言语与非言语反馈方式上来综合判断他的理解情况。

8.2.2 澳大利亚警察告知中的单向性

澳大利亚的警察告知也面临与英国类似的情况。以新南威尔士州为例,警察告知也经历了屡次语言修订,但仍然存在类似的理解与沟通问题:无论在警示的表意还是沟通上,都存在单向性,没有考虑受众的接受心理。

根据Gibbons(2003)的研究,改良过的警察告知可以分为五个片段,分别用于几个不同的询问阶段,问话开始阶段、休息之后的问话阶段、休息之后需要有录像录音的问话阶段、问话结束的阶段。其中,片段1原文如下:

(9)“You are not obliged to say or do anything unless you wish to do so,but whatever you say or do may be used in evidence.Do you understand?”

如果你不愿意,你没有义务说什么或做什么,但是,你所说的任何话或做的任何事都将作为证据。你明白这个吗?

与美国的米兰达规则类似,当警察将这些书面语特征浓厚的文字,口头告知被询问人时,这些表述仍然会造成理解与交流上的障碍。首先,句型复杂。例(9)中既包含由多重并列或复合组成的复杂句,也包含语法隐喻(Halliday,1978)。“you are not obliged to say”与“to do anything”构成复合句,“unless”引导的让步状语从句中的替代省略“so”指向句外其他成分,句法隐喻“whatever you say or do”由完整的小句状态压缩为复合主语,成为“maybeused”的主语,这些都增加了理解的难度。另外,使用了比较难懂的句型或词汇。当认知加工难度大的被动句与艰涩难懂的法律术语“in evidence”,以及低频词“obliged”结合在一起,就大大增加了理解难度。最后,问话“Do you understand?”所指向的概念包含两个以上的命题,也会造成交际沟通的难度。

事实上,大多数情况下,无论是嫌疑人还是警察都不一定会认真、清楚地理解警察告知的实质内容。从例(10)中所呈现的会话交际记录来看,即使在嫌疑人已经明确表示不愿意进行谈话的情况下,问话的警察依然继续询问,由此可知,该警察根本不明白“警察告知”的实际目的与沟通效果,仅仅把宣读“警察告知”当作例行公事。

(10)Police officer:You are not obliged to say or do anything unless you wish to do so,but whatever you say or do will be electronically recorded and may be used in evidence.Do you understand that?

Suspect:Yeah.

Police officer:Do you agree that prior to the commencement of this interview I told you that I intended asking you further questions about this matter?

Suspect:Yeah but=

Police officer:=well,do you agree that=

→Suspect:=I don't want to say anything.

Police officer:OK.

→Suspect:Cause I can't remember.

※Police officer:That's all right,but do you agree that prior,before I commenced this interview,in the presence of Mr.Kennett,I told you that I was going to ask you some questions about=

Suspect:=Yeah.Yeah.Yeah.(Gibbons,2003:191)

从以上这个言语片段来看,在警察与嫌疑人的交际过程中,虽然嫌疑人对警察的问话“do you agree...”不断地回答“yeah”,并且也明确表示了不想说话的意思(见带箭头的话语“I don't want to say”),但是警察却不理会对方的回应,继续进行警察告知(见带※的话语),使得嫌疑人只能回答“yeah”。因此,在实际传达与沟通“警察告知”时,互动交际的过程非常重要,必须确保警察与嫌疑人同时加入并参与到该交际过程,从他们在上下文的言语反馈上看交际的双方是否在“真正地”进行意义沟通。

可喜的是,根据专家的建议,已经将(9)(片段1)的表述简化为:

(11)I am going to ask you some questions.You do not have to answer if you do not want to.Do you understand that?

We will record what you say.We can use this recording in court.Do you understand?(Gibbons,2003:191)

我要问你一些问题。如果你不想回答,你可以不用回答。明白吗?

我们会对你的话语进行录音,我们也会把录音用于法庭上。明白吗?

显然,(11)比(9)的警示表述更加准确、浅显,也更易懂。文本(9)的“警察告知”的下一个片段(休息之后开始问话时的告知部分)的语言表述为:

(12)Do you agree that prior to the commencement of this interview I told you that I intended asking further questions about this matter?

当然,(12)中部分文字也有上文所说的几个问题,比如词汇难度、句型复杂等。即使英语本族语的使用者也对此多有疑惑,如(13)的交际记录所示:

(13)P:Right.Do you agree that prior to the commencement of this record of interview,I told,told you I intended to ask you further questions about this matter?

→S:Yeah.Should I um,I don't know-

P:And do you agree I,I'm going to ask you further questions about this matter?I want you to understand that you're not obliged to say anything aboutit,unless you wish,as anything you say may later be used in evidence.Do you understand that?

S:Ah,yeah,what should I do though?

P:Well,mate,it's a matter for yourself.But you remember prior to starting, you said that you had no objection to us talking on the,on the tape?

S:Yeah.I don't know[longpause]I don't know.

(Gibbons,2003:193-4)

从(13)所记录的交际过程来看,嫌疑人(S)仍然没有领会警察的问话,连续给出几个“我不知道”的回复(见带箭头的话轮)。可见,嫌疑人根本无法理解“警察告知”的真正意思。经过简化的版本是这样的:

(14)Iamgoingtoaskyoumorequestions.Doyouunderstandthat?[1]

为方便读者比较,这里把“警察告知”的其他两个语段的前后修改版本对比如下(O代表旧版本,N代表新版本)。

(15)O:What I propose to do is ask you further questions in relation to this matter. My questions and any answers given by you will be electronically recorded on tapes the interview takes place.Do you understand that?

N:I am going to ask you more questions.Do you understand that?

We will video-tape our questions.Do you understand?

(Gibbons,2003:194-197)

(16)O:Has any threat,promise,or offer of advantage been held out to you to give the answers recorded in this interview?

N:Has any promise been made to you to make this statement?

Has any threat been made to you to make this statement?

Have you been induced to make this statement?

Has anything offered to you to make this statement?

(Gibbons,2003:194-197)

经过受试者对两个版本的实验比对,新版本获得更多人的赞同(Gibbons,2003:198)。尽管语言专家对新改进的告知表述仍然存有异议,但我们不得不承认,当下的修改是警方权衡利弊之后的最佳选择,而要在警察与嫌疑人两个目标人群之间找到平衡点,既要使告知语言的表述经得起法庭上专业人士的考证,又要使普通人容易理解,是一件难度很高的事情。

尽管如此,很多有社会责任感的语言学家与法律专家仍然致力于“警察告知”的交际研究工作,在重构警察告知的过程中,针对受众的方言特征、受众的身份等进行了很多有价值的尝试。澳大利亚土著语言翻译服务机构(Aboriginal Interpreter Service, Australia)与澳大利亚北领地州警局(Northern Terrotary Police)及司法部门的人员合作设计了两份警察告知,一份针对羁押人员,一份针对非羁押的嫌疑人,而且对每一份告知都配有18种土著语言的录音版本(Aboriginal Interpreter Service,2015)[2]。从英文版本的警察告知来看,这两份告知的语言表述都很平实易懂,虽然在录音中采用一个人来宣读,但其宣读告知充分考虑到了受众的认知能力。

针对羁押人员的警察告知是这样设计的:

(17)Standardized Audio Police Caution(SAPC)—Englishfront-translation—in custody

Recording1:For A Person In Custody

①Listen carefully to this story.

②The police think you may be broke the law.

③That's why the police arrest you and brought you here.

④You can not leave unless they say that you can leave.

⑤When the police talk to you about this trouble,the police must follow two laws carefully.

⑥Listen carefully to these two laws.

⑦Law number 1 says this:

⑧The police cannot keep you here secretly.

⑨If you want to talk to your family,or may be afriend,tell the police.

⑩Then you canring them and tell them where you are.

⑪That is what law number 1 says.

⑫Law number 2 says this:

⑬May be the police will ask you many questions about the trouble.

⑭May be they will ask you to show them something about the trouble.

⑮If you don't want to say anything to them or show them anything,that's OK.

⑯The police can not force you to say anything about that trouble.They can not force you to show them anything.

⑰The police will record your story—everything you say and everything you show them.

a.Police might take your story to court and the judge and other people in court can listen to your story and hear you talking.

b.They will listen to your words to decide if you did break the law or if you didn't break the law.

⑱That's what law number 2 says.

⑲This recording is finished now.

⑳You can tell the police what you want to do.

标准化录音版警察告知——英文原文——适合于羁押人员

录音1:对羁押人员的告知

①请仔细听这个介绍。

②警察认为你可能触犯了法律。

③因此警察逮捕你并把你带到这里。

④不经他们允许,你不能离开这里。

⑤警察与你谈这个麻烦事的时候,他们必须遵守两条法律。

⑥请仔细听懂这两条法律的内容。

⑦第一条法律是这样说的:

⑧警察无权把你秘密困在这里。

⑨如你想与家人或朋友说话,请告诉警察。

⑩你可以给他们打电话,告诉他们你在哪里。

⑪这是第一条法律的内容。

⑫第二条法律说的是:

⑬关于这个麻烦事,也许警察会问你一些话。

⑭关于这个麻烦事,也许他们会让你给他们看一些东西。

⑮如果你不想说什么或不想出示什么,你可以这样做。

⑯警察不能强迫你说什么,他们也不能强迫你出示什么。

⑰警察会把你的话录下来,包括你说的所有话或出示的所有东西。

a.警察会把你的话语或东西带到法庭,法官与法庭上的其他人会听到你的话。

b.法官与法庭上的其他人会听你的话,然后决定你是否犯法或是否没有犯法。

⑱这是第二条法律的内容。

⑲录音结束了。

⑳你可以告诉警察你想干什么。

针对非羁押人员的司法警示是这样设计的:

(18)Standardized Audio Police Caution(SAPC)—English front-translation—in custody

Recording2:For A Person Not In Custody

①Listen carefully to this story.

②The police think you may be broke the law.

③That's why the police asked you to come here.

④The police cannot make you stay here.You can leave if you want to leave.

⑤When the police talk to you about this trouble,the police must follow the law carefully.

⑥Listen carefully to the law.

⑦The law says this:

⑧Maybe the police will ask you many questions about the trouble.

⑨Maybe they will ask you to show them something about the trouble.

⑩If you don't want to say anything to them or show them anything,that's OK.

⑪The police cannot force you to say anything about that trouble.They cannot force you to show them anything.

⑫The police will record your story—everything you say and everything you show them.

a.Police might take your story to court and the judge and other people in Court can listen to your story and hear you talking.

b.They will listen to your words to decide if you did break the law or if you didn't break the law.

⑬That's what the law says.

⑭This recording is finished now.

⑮You can tell the police what you want to do.

标准化录音版警察告知——英文原文——适合于非羁押人员

录音2:对非羁押人员的告知

①请仔细听这个介绍。

②警察认为你可能触犯了法律。

③因此警察请你来到这里。

④警察无权让你留在这里。如果你不愿意待在这里,你可以离开。

⑤警察与你谈这个麻烦事的时候,他们必须遵守一条法律。

⑥请仔细听懂这条法律的内容。

⑦这条法律是这样说的:

⑧关于这个麻烦事,也许警察会问你一些话。

⑨关于这个麻烦事,也许他们会让你给他们看一些东西。

⑩如果你不想说什么或不想出示什么,你可以这样做。

⑪警察不能强迫你说什么,他们也不能强迫你出示什么。

⑫警察会把你的话录下来,包括你说的所有话或出示的所有东西。

a.警察会把你的话语或东西带到法庭,法官与法庭上的其他人会听到你的话。

b.法官与法庭上的其他人会听你的话,然后决定你是否犯法或是否没有犯法。

⑬这是这条法律的内容。

⑭录音结束了。

⑮你可以告诉警察你想干什么。

对比(17)与(18)两份警察告知,可以看出针对两种不同的告知对象,告知语言在内容上有差异,但告知的语气与顺序都很清楚、明了。经过对18种土著语言与英语之间的回译检验,基本上排除了可能存在的表述差异,达到了对警察告知的有效表达。当然,正如该土著语言翻译服务协会所说,该录音版的告知并不能免除警察在实践中行使其警察告知的法定义务,也不能代替译者的现场口译服务,但是该“警察告知”(录音版)在澳大利亚北领地州官方网站正式公开发布,对广大的土著居民与一般的英语受众提供了法律宣传服务,也为警察提高其告知沟通提供了一些实践参照。鉴于其个性化的社区服务与特殊的社会贡献,该方案最终获得了北领地州2015年的人权奖(Diana,2017)。

尽管这两份警察告知无法替代司法实践中的警察告知沟通行为,但它在设计中所体现出的一些指导原则,比如针对受话人的身份设计不同的告知内容,针对受话人的方言特点给出相应的语言版本,告知的内容要简单明了,由多方合作设计并建构警察告知等,这些对于完善警察告知的意义建构具有重要的作用。

8.2.3 加拿大警察告知的有限动态性

加拿大的警告告知(the Canadian Charter warning)最早见于R.诉Hebert案,此案确定了嫌疑人可享有一系列权利,在警察问话前应该得到明确的告知。具体告知的格式如下:

(19)You are under arrest for__________ (charge),do you understand?You have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay.We will provide you with a toll-free telephone lawyer referral service,if you do not have your own lawyer.Anything you do say can and will be used in court as evidence.Do you understand?Would you like to speak to a lawyer?

因__________指控要逮捕你,明白吗?你有权即刻聘请并咨询律师。如果你没有律师,我们将会给你提供免费的律师热线。你的所有陈述也将呈堂证供。明白吗?你需要跟律师谈谈吗?(引自R.诉Hebert[1990判决],《美国最高法院判例汇编》第2卷,第151页开始

在司法实践中,这一告知的实施与落实情况各不相同。更加普遍、简易的告知版本如下:

(20)I am arresting you for(Xcharge).It is my duty to inform you that you have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay.You may call any lawyer you want. There is a 24-hour telephone service available which provides a legal aid duty lawyer who can give you legal advice in private.This advice is given without charge and the lawyer can explain the legal aid plan to you.If you wish to contact a legal aid duty lawyer,I can provide you with a telephone number.Do you understand?Do you want to call a lawyer?You are not obliged to say anything,but anything you do say may be given in evidence.

因某项指控,我要逮捕你。我有责任通知你,你有权即刻聘请律师并得到律师的意见。你可以打电话给任何一个律师。我们备有24小时免费律师热线,使你能得到法律援助。这项服务是免费的,律师会告知你能获得什么样的法律援助。如果你想联系一位提供援助服务的律师,我可以给你电话号码。明白吗?你要不要打电话给律师?你什么也不需要说,但如果你说话,你所说的话将被当作证据。

显而易见,(20)简化版的“警察告知”比(19)的“警察告知”要详细得多,简易得多,动态得多。从文体来说,在(20)这则告知语篇中,交际的双向动态性比较显著。“I”(我)在文本中出现,明示了说话人的角色,使得说话人成为实施这些告知指令的服务提供者,听话人(嫌疑人)成为这些指令的选择者,对指令的告知显得更加动态、口语化,使得这些指令更加生活化,具有更多可操作性,更能被文化程度一般或较低的嫌疑人所理解。但是,以上文本中仍然有大量比较复杂的法律词汇,如“retain consel”(聘请律师)、“instruct consel”(咨询律师)等,也许会影响对警示的沟通与理解。

[1] 尽管“Do you understand?”这一问话可以使警示的说话人从对警示命题的陈述,转向对嫌疑人的问话交际,但是,总的来说,这一问话显得非常强硬、权威,对嫌疑人的心理震慑作用也很大,不一定能真正起到促进交际的作用。对此,我们将在后面做进一步讨论。

[2] https://dhcd.nt.gov.au/our-services/aboriginal-language-police-cautions-aboriginal-interpreter-service.2017年6月27日获取。

免责声明:以上内容源自网络,版权归原作者所有,如有侵犯您的原创版权请告知,我们将尽快删除相关内容。

我要反馈