| المستخلص: |
The thesis clarifies that evidences of the criminal trial is subject to the rule of free evidence in criminal matters according to the principle" judicial conviction "the principle of emotional conviction. It is, therefore, the court that assesses the evidences according to its absolute discretion, and according to the conviction, the criminal trial court will determine the value of the evidence and determine its validity in whether it can be relied upon to convict the accused. However, there is no doubt that the exact legal concept of judicial conviction is reflected in the fact that the judge in the criminal court is governed by the law and that his will should not be absent when he starts his court, and if to say there is a lack of the judge's will, that itself leads to the lack of judicial authority itself. When a judge sentencing, he based his sentence on the text of the legislation, this requires a degree of freedom. Absolutely, he has such freedom. However, this freedom of the criminal judge is to a certain degree in order to build his emotional conscience, thus, the emotional conscience is not an absolute matter, but is subject to controls and conditions in weighing the evidences. Here, the researcher has conveyed several controls and conditions in helping the judge to reach his emotional conviction. Therefore, we find that this specific power is not a complete power. If the judge has the right to assess and choose a sentence, he cannot assess and choose in any way he wishes, the power granted to the judge is not granted to him to pursue it on his own. Having said so, the power of the judge has limited objectives which he should strive to achieve and to exercise such power in accordance with certain methods, technical means, and specific principles. The judge's discretion is based on a number of specific rules, and his power in assessing the evidence is not an absolute, it is restricted. The judge must build his conviction on valid and legitimate evidence in the case, and the evidences must have basis and related to the case, yet, effective.
Also, the judge builds his discretion evidence based on certainty; his judgment must be reasoned and parallel to logic. We also found that the Jordanian legislator has not to address the power of the criminal judge to assess the evidence directly in the Jordanian Code of Criminal Procedures, which made the matter a subject to judicial jurisdiction and jurisprudence. We concluded that the evidence contained all oral statements made by the complainant, such as police gratification, judicial confession and the acquittal of the accused against another accused. We have also examined the power of the criminal judge to assess the evidence based on the stage at which the evidence is issued. Based on the above, the thesis contains a preliminary chapter, which explains the concept of the judge's power in assessing the evidence by examining the legal and judicial concept, and then examining the powers of the criminal judge's authority in the estimation of the evidence. The power of the criminal judge was also examined in the estimation of pre-trial evidence. The first chapter deals with the power of the criminal judge to assess the evidence in the inference stage and his power to assess the evidence in the preliminary investigation stage.. The second chapter was devoted to examining the power of the criminal judge to assess the evidence given at the trial stage. Then, discussion follows to examine the extent control of the Jordanian Court of Cassation over the assessment of oral evidences followed by conclusion and recommendations.
|
