第三只眼看法制英译文：
7月25日上传 每周一更新 "Third Eye reads for the bar" (Part 4)
--- Law and Order: Viewed from outsider
In this the "TRUTH" is also mean "LAW TRUTH", but "NATURE TRUTH". Viewed from the logic between "TRUTH" and "EVIDENCE", it is easy to know that "EVIDENCE" reach the confirmation of "TRUTH", and "TRUTH" reach the verdict of "LAW". "TRUTH" can reason from not only "EVIDENCE" but also other ways, specially through the default of Law Order System, "TRUTH" can be confirmed matter-of-course natively.
Thinking me personal, "TRUTH's confirmation" is categorise 3 classes: [1]testify by one party. [2]agree by both party. [3]cognize by LAW SYSTEM.
The 1st class is known easily --- pass over.
The 2nd class is elucidated explicitly. For example, in 1992' #22 Law Attachments By HIGHEST COURT---"HIGHEST COURT's Interpretative Rules of <<CIVIL PROCEDURE LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA>>"---Article 75 "With follow facts the litigant has not been needed testification: [1] One party has validated clearly with the other party's state facts and submitting claim."
The 3rd class is exclusive with Law Order System --- "TRUTH" can reason from Court's Cognizance owned self. For example, according to the Law Logic's prolongation and loop internally, the facts of effective legal papers or notarial deed, the judgment with the litigant's "Interactive Benefits" before accepting a case, etc, have not been needed testification also. It is cognize only by itself.
With a summary of the main points, "TRUTH's Confirmation" comes from 3 ways: "Testify", "Agree" and "Cognize" ......
(Continue Weekly)
writer/tanweekly
2005.7.25 translate
Haikou China
------------------------------------------------
A murmur in a whisper
likes the voice of ghost with deep-rooted
keep shady under my body ,
Is it mine like mine ? ...... It is its like mine !
They can see around faces which I see share my eyes,
they can listen around talks which I listen share my ears,
they can know all my acts which I think about share my head !
writer/transparent-man: a single-acting telepathy man
excerpt from <<Nowadays Wizard Experience --- a recourse of transparent-man>>, which has been post to The State Council of China, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Chinese Central Television etc for statement and confirmation
原文：
在法律范畴中，从“（法律）事实”和“证据”的关系来看，“证据”是为确认“事实”而服务的，而“事实”则是为司法判定而服务的。“（法律）事实”可以用“证据”来作“确认”，但也可以通过其他方式而确认，甚至可以在法律（逻辑）体系内，通过“制度性的默认”，从而不言而喻地、无可争辩地获得“先天性般”的确认。。。
从前述可知，“事实”的确认一般有三种方式：一是某一方的举证（证明）；二是双方的确认；三是审判中制度性的认定。第一点就不多说了。关于第二点，在1992年法发(22)号文“最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法CIVIL PROCEDURE LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA》若干问题的意见”中，第75条第一款“下列事实，当事人无需举证：一方当事人对另一方当事人陈述的案件事实和提出的诉讼请求，明确表示承认的；”，就作了法律上的明文规定。
关于第三点对事实的“认定”方式，是专属于法律审理架构性的“专门专业”的规定。上面的第75条文的其他几款，就是法庭根据自身的内洽逻辑，制定的对“已发生效力的法律文书及公证书等涉及的事实”所作的“认定”。当然，在纯理论上，法庭的“认定”事实还包括很多其他《若干问题的意见》中所没有涉及的方面，如在接受立案时，对双方当事人的“利益相关性”所作的“认定”，否则就会不接受“立案”了；还有庭审过程中，当庭的“（明显的）谎言”等“事实”，也是无须“举证”，属“认定”范畴。
归纳一下，“事实”的定论是由“证明”“确认”及“认定”三种途径来实现。。。（待续）
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
“耳边轻轻地窃窃私语，犹如心底深处恶魔般的声音
好像是自己的声音，其实却是别人的声音。”
“他们通过我的眼睛，能看到周围人的面孔
他们通过我的耳朵，能听到周围人的声音
他们通过我的大脑，能轻松地预知下一步我想要做什么”
文／透明人——即一个具有“单向心电感应”（single-acting telepathy）的人
摘自资料《现代种盎历程——一个透明人的求助》，曾寄送国务院、中国科学院、中央电视台等相关机构以作说明（及确认）
7月18日上传 每周一更新 "Third Eye reads for the bar" (Part 3)
I am not a prefessional of law, So I searched for the Normal Schoolbook(Chinese Version) of "Jurisprudence" and "Evidence" on internet in the other days, and nothing but just some Classical Masterpiece like <American Constitutional law> and <Athenian Constitution> etc. These books as often as concentrate on Theories of Law Soul, and not Theories of Law Act (categorise 3 levels personal: Theories of Law Soul, Theories of Law Act and Practicalness of Law Act).
In follow-mentioned I dissertate what I think about myself. Maybe it is volatile and baroque like the Chaos of Nature, and I think it is revelatory and helpful to prefessional of law.
"Truth" and "Evidence" are the key stones in Law Sentence best of all concepts. All of the Law Sentence Process, also Court Judgement namely, is based on that 2 key stones --- through the reasonable and judiciary logic, then get the definite verdict up to the law mark.
(Continue Weekly)
writer/tanweekly
2005.7.18 translate
Haikou China
------------------------------------------------
A murmur in a whisper
likes the voice of ghost with deep-rooted
keep shady under my body ,
Is it mine like mine ? ...... It is its like mine !
They can see around faces which I see share my eyes,
they can listen around talks which I listen share my ears,
they can know all my acts which I think about share my head !
writer/transparent-man: a single-acting telepathy man
excerpt from <<Nowadays Wizard Experience --- a recourse of transparent-man>>, which has been post to The State Council of China, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Chinese Central Television etc for statement and confirmation
原文：
最近这几天，想在网络上找些《法理学》及《证据学》等方面的标准教科书下载，但却遍寻不着，只是那些考卷试题或教学影像等参考资料的下载。而那些找得到的国际经典学术名著，如《美国宪法概论》、《自然法典》等，却往往都是在宏观法律理念价值方向上的“精神阐述”，而牵涉的操作性“方向”的理念阐述较少（指第二层次的针对“操作性”的理念，而非具体实务）。。。因此，下面的我自己本人的一些观点，也只能是“天马行空”地发挥一下，可能行文不很“专业化”，但个人认为其内容还是很有一些借鉴意义的，望能对业内人士在更深入的理论研探上，有所帮助。。。前人种树，可惜可叹的是，前人是乘不到凉的。从一定角度上说，就算这个官司我输了，但我也是“赢”了。。。
“事实”和“证据”，个人认为，这是法律判定中最为关键的两个概念。整个司法判定过程，也即主要指法庭审理，都是基于这两个“基点”，通过合理的、司法的“逻辑”推演，从而得出符合法律所规范的、明确无误的“结论”。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
“耳边轻轻地窃窃私语，犹如心底深处恶魔般的声音
好像是自己的声音，其实却是别人的声音。”
“他们通过我的眼睛，能看到周围人的面孔
他们通过我的耳朵，能听到周围人的声音
他们通过我的大脑，能轻松地预知下一步我想要做什么”
文／透明人——即一个具有“单向心电感应”（single-acting telepathy）的人
摘自资料《现代种盎历程——一个透明人的求助》，曾寄送国务院、中国科学院、中央电视台等相关机构以作说明（及确认）
7月11日上传 每周一更新 "Third Eye reads for the bar" (Part 2)
"TENACITY" stative with those litigating people in the street is pointed out in above-mentioned , not only being effort , but also knowing like a book to do the best litigating you hope for. Especially about the micro act in the litigating process, it is in favour or in badness of the litigant objectively.
From my experience in person , Court Debate Record often be admitted explanation of this side , but excluded of that side. And when you raise a question , the judge will answer the standard words follow back: " You say let you say. You can make a difficulty , but court just make a record....." Hours past the court debate end, many people sign in rough , sitting loose the means of expression with nicety......
As for the Court Debate Record leanning to, it is seen much that the recording has a large per cent with this side , but that side. Although it is allowed the litigant submit Record Supplement Behindhand to court in law process , (at China) a lot of people are unaware of this rights.
The key of this case is: In Court Debate , both of the litigants have get same time and spirits to appear before a court , but the Court Debate Record has a large per cent with one sided , and the other one must to take a Supplement Behindhand by oneself. It is unfair !!! It is not fit in with Peer-to-Peer Rules !!!
(Continue Weekly)
writer/tanweekly
2005.7.11 translate
Haikou China
------------------------------------------------
A murmur in a whisper
likes the voice of ghost with deep-rooted
keep shady under my body ,
Is it mine like mine ? ...... It is its like mine !
They can see around faces which I see share my eyes,
they can listen around talks which I listen share my ears,
they can know all my acts which I think about share my head !
writer/transparent-man: a single-acting telepathy man
excerpt from <<Nowadays Wizard Experience --- a recourse of transparent-man>>, which has been post to The State Council of China, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Chinese Central Television etc for statement and confirmation
原文：
昨天说到老百姓打官司要有一个“执着”的心态，但单单有这“纯主观上的努力”还不行，还需在“客观上”真正熟悉了解“法律诉讼”的一些技术上的“窍门”或“关键结点”。其中，特别是“诉讼过程”中的一些有利或有弊于当事人的“运作操作”，因为，作为法律依据文本，一般“操作”的弹性度很小，而且大都是以文字形式正式记录在案卷上的。而那些“诉讼过程”中的一些“小动作”，则往往是“非正式的”、“不记录在案”的，但又会对诉讼结果起很大的、甚至决定性的影响。就我的切身体会，“庭审笔录”中，有时会过多记录的是某一方的辩词，而有意忽略另一方的辩词。特别地，当事人如提出异议，法官则会以“标准回应”来处理：法庭上让你说时，你才能说。且，对方说的，法庭只是记录下来，你可以不同意。。。但“猫腻”就在这里，过了几个小时后，庭审结束，要双方签字时，很多不知“审判”操作的人，往往会看了差不多就签了。但却不知当你“签字”时，当时的那个“异议点”-（可能）-就算间接默示“同意”了？（我也是这几天才悟到的）。虽然在法律程序上，还允许当事人对庭审笔录作“事后个人补充”，但很多人往往不知自身的这个“权利”。且，法庭中，双方当事人耗了同样时间出庭，而法官却在笔录中过多地“着墨”与某一方，另一方却要另花时间再弄份事后说明补充，这不符合“对等”的原则。。。由于庭审过程中停电，本应当时当场的签名，我过了几天后才签的。后来想把庭审笔录作份复印，但法院却以违反规定不予同意。。。在我以后文字还会详细再提一些“应注意的小节处”，打官司的一定要留意此类关键点。。。（待续）附上初审的判决书，点击此处
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
“耳边轻轻地窃窃私语，犹如心底深处恶魔般的声音
好像是自己的声音，其实却是别人的声音。”
“他们通过我的眼睛，能看到周围人的面孔
他们通过我的耳朵，能听到周围人的声音
他们通过我的大脑，能轻松地预知下一步我想要做什么”
文／透明人——即一个具有“单向心电感应”（single-acting telepathy）的人
摘自资料《现代种盎历程——一个透明人的求助》，曾寄送国务院、中国科学院、中央电视台等相关机构以作说明（及确认）
7月4日上传 每周一更新 "Third Eye reads for the bar" (Part 1)
"How to litigate? (at China)" --- It is all known that lawsuit is not like words "LAWSUIT", just let you write 7 characters, especially for a man who have been around a lot and for the Chinese Non-Standardized stative with social order and cultural contexts. Usually, it makes the litigant put forth his(her) best endeavors as this words "TENACITY" if I make it embellishing literarily. To those people rough it or less-education, sometimes a word with severeness in disguise of clerk can let the litigant get out or lead the nose of wax by the nose.
In the other days with my first litigating, I looked through blue glasses for these. I have set eyes on these things more than once that someones press their suit to judge(or law-clerk) in foyer of lawcourt. Maybe as a controller or a intercessor in yamun at China needs some authoritativeness for his job easily, but en .... Is the "AUTHORITATIVENESS" really being on the ascendency and the lordliness ? .... And that the key point in those links is: A servile man or a man no self-benefits is a man no win.
(Continue Weekly)
writer/tanweekly
2005.7.4 translate
Haikou China
------------------------------------------------
A murmur in a whisper
likes the voice of ghost with deep-rooted
keep shady under my body ,
Is it mine like mine ? ...... It is its like mine !
They can see around faces which I see share my eyes,
they can listen around talks which I listen share my ears,
they can know all my acts which I think about share my head !
writer/transparent-man: a single-acting telepathy man
excerpt from <<Nowadays Wizard Experience --- a recourse of transparent-man>>, which has been post to The State Council of China, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Chinese Central Television etc for statement and confirmation
原文：
本来觉得这个议题，是一个很好的“写作方向”，至少就此出一本书，应该是不会“滞销”的。但一方面，本人没有这方面的实务操作，另一方面，关键是“透明人”的问题（对于此事，从我网站上知情的人，就知了；不知情的人，我这里也不想多展开了）。。。涉世较深的人都知道，在中国这个社会文化氛围内，打官司，并不仅是法律文本上“打官司”这个字眼那么简单明了。很多时候，需要打官司的人放下一切，套用文学性的修饰词语，就是“执着”！特别是对于处于底层的某些人来说，有时候，往往经办人的一句（装出来的）“严厉”的话语，就能把其推之门外，或在以后的经办过程中“牵着没主见当事者”的鼻子走。
前些时候，在我第一次打官司的过程中，领教了这一些。我多次见某些投诉人在大庭中，低声下气地向法官（或经办人）苦苦哀求。可能作为“衙门中人”或管理者，需要一定的“权威”以利开展工作，但“权威”真的是建立在气势或气派上的吗？“以理服人”及“背后的国家强制力”才是真正的“恩威并重”。。。而且，关键是，一个“奴性的人”或没有自身利益立场的人，是不可能真正打赢官司的。但令人可叹的是，现在的社会文化氛围，特别是牵涉官场中的“游戏规则”，往往有意无意地培养着这类人，并进行人性价值尽度上的逆选择（不过，好象国内现在标准社会价值观念中，“人性”这一坐标取向并不特别推崇，更多的是伦理、传统道德、）。。。（待续）
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
“耳边轻轻地窃窃私语，犹如心底深处恶魔般的声音
好像是自己的声音，其实却是别人的声音。”
“他们通过我的眼睛，能看到周围人的面孔
他们通过我的耳朵，能听到周围人的声音
他们通过我的大脑，能轻松地预知下一步我想要做什么”
文／透明人——即一个具有“单向心电感应”（single-acting telepathy）的人
摘自资料《现代种盎历程——一个透明人的求助》，曾寄送国务院、中国科学院、中央电视台等相关机构以作说明（及确认）
以前月份的“每日观点新闻评议”点击下链：(2005年7月以后为“第三只眼看法制(英译文)”）
2005年 1月份 2月份 3月份 4月份 5月份 6月份 7月份 本月份