"留有余地判决"是法院和法官在审判中部分地屈从于外在的压力、违背自身内在的理性与良心,忽视法律定罪在案件事实认定和法律适用方面的严格要求,力图在法律的应然要求和现实的掣肘因素之间、在国家权力(或强势群体力量)和公民权利的冲突之间作出调和、妥协处理的一系列判决样态。虽然可以从法律社会学和法律经济学视角中找到这种实然选择的理由,但"留有余地判决"缺乏法理和法律规范的正当性支持。对"留有余地判决"及其错案的预防,应从明确事故责任主体、防止责任外化、转移、强化裁判者个体责任意识和能力等方面综合调控。
“Leaving room for verdict”has,in some degree,been a verdict mode for some j udges and courts dealing with some criminal cases.In these cases,j udges and courts succumb to external pressure,deviating from their intrinsic rationality and good faith,ignoring the strict law requirements of law conviction in fact-finding and applicable law,try to make a balance between “should be”and “actually is”,and reconcile the conflict between state power and civil rights.Although some real reasons,which come from the view of law-sociology and economics of law,can be found in this choice,“leaving room for verdict”can not be j ustified by j urisprudence and legal norms.To prevent from the mode of“leaving room for verdict”and its misj udged cases, we should keep focus on comprehensive regulation,such as clearly defining the main responsibility subj ects for the accident,preventing the responsibilities from being enlarged,weakened or transferred,and enhancing individual j udge’s sense