A Study on Character Evidence in Juvenile Delinquency Cases

Abstract

Character evidence refers to evidentiary materials that reflect the individual attributes of juvenile criminal suspects and defendants, such as their upbringing environment, social interactions, moral character, personality traits, and past behavioral patterns. In the practice of juvenile criminal justice, its main function is to provide references for judicial authorities in conviction, sentencing and correction by comprehensively assessing the personal dangerousness and recidivism risk of minors, embodying the special judicial principle of “education first, punishment second”. Different from the cautious application of character evidence in adult cases, juvenile cases tend to emphasize the use of character evidence to explore the individual causes behind juvenile delinquency. At present, China has generally established a framework for the character evidence system in juvenile justice practice. The Criminal Procedure Law and relevant judicial interpretations explicitly stipulate that when handling juvenile criminal cases, the circumstances of the minor’s growth experience, causes of delinquency, guardianship and education shall be investigated, and such investigation materials may be used as character evidence. However, several problems still exist in practical application: First, the legal orientation is relatively vague, and it is not clear whether character evidence belongs to conviction evidence or sentencing evidence. Second, there is a lack of norms in specific implementation, with no unified guidelines for the subjects, procedures and standards of proof for evidence collection. Third, the application varies across regions, with significant differences in the depth of application between developed areas and grassroots judicial organs. This paper holds that improving the character evidence system is a key part of juvenile justice reform. Its significance lies not only in optimizing the adjudication of individual cases, but also in promoting the fundamental transformation of judicial philosophy from “punishment-oriented” to “restoration-oriented”, so as to ultimately achieve the organic unity of legal effects and social effects.