Advanced

Håller ett erkännande i rätten? - En studie om hur erkännanden behandlas som bevismedel i grova brottmål

Jonson, Linn LU (2018) LAGF03 20181
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
This essay aims to investigate how a confession is used as evaluation of evidence in serious crimes. Courts in Sweden practices the principle of free evaluation of evidence which means that the court shall examine all evidence in the case by optional method. The consequence of this is further on that there are no rules controlling how to evaluate a confession as evidence – a confession can therefore be the basis of the assessment. The evaluation of a confession as evidence is in Swedish courts tested in two steps. At first the court has to make sure that the confession is seriously meant to be a confession, then they have to try if there are any reasons to question the confession. There are many different types of false confessions, the... (More)
This essay aims to investigate how a confession is used as evaluation of evidence in serious crimes. Courts in Sweden practices the principle of free evaluation of evidence which means that the court shall examine all evidence in the case by optional method. The consequence of this is further on that there are no rules controlling how to evaluate a confession as evidence – a confession can therefore be the basis of the assessment. The evaluation of a confession as evidence is in Swedish courts tested in two steps. At first the court has to make sure that the confession is seriously meant to be a confession, then they have to try if there are any reasons to question the confession. There are many different types of false confessions, the court has to question the confession if they indicate that one of these types may present.

Further on the question if a confession is enough to reach the evidentiary requirement is investigated. In some cases, the court has been able to judge a person with only his or her confession as evidence. The confession has to be supported by other investigation in some way though. It is controversial if there is a demand from court practice saying that the confession has to be supported with other evidence. A demand is not compatible with the principle of free evaluation of evidence. Through vague indications the supreme court of Sweden has anyway stated that there should be some kind of supporting evidence proving a verbal evidence.

The consequence of false confessions in some cases is considered credible and reliable means that innocent people in these cases are convicted for crimes. The formal rule of law imposes a demand of predictability and legality. There also has to be a trust in the application of law and the fact that the rules are applied correctly. To get convicted after giving a false confession shows shortage in the rule of law, shortages which indicates that the formal rule of law can not be considered fulfilled towards the person whom the decision is against. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats behandlar värderingen av erkännanden som bevis i grova brottmål. Inom svensk rätt råder fri bevisprövning vilket innebär att rätten ska pröva all inkommen bevisning i målet och värdera denna utifrån valfri metod. Detta innebär fortsättningsvis att det inte finns några regler som kan utesluta att endast ett erkännande ligger till grund för bedömningen. Bevisvärderingen av erkännanden behandlas inom svensk rätt i två steg. Först ska rätten bedöma att det rör sig om ett verkligt menat erkännande, därefter ska de pröva om det finns någon anledning att ifrågasätta detta erkännande. Det finns en rad olika former av falska erkännanden, vid indikation på att någon av dessa kan föreligga bör rätten agera ifrågasättande i värderingen... (More)
Denna uppsats behandlar värderingen av erkännanden som bevis i grova brottmål. Inom svensk rätt råder fri bevisprövning vilket innebär att rätten ska pröva all inkommen bevisning i målet och värdera denna utifrån valfri metod. Detta innebär fortsättningsvis att det inte finns några regler som kan utesluta att endast ett erkännande ligger till grund för bedömningen. Bevisvärderingen av erkännanden behandlas inom svensk rätt i två steg. Först ska rätten bedöma att det rör sig om ett verkligt menat erkännande, därefter ska de pröva om det finns någon anledning att ifrågasätta detta erkännande. Det finns en rad olika former av falska erkännanden, vid indikation på att någon av dessa kan föreligga bör rätten agera ifrågasättande i värderingen av erkännandet som bevisning.

Fortsättningsvis utreds frågan om ett erkännande är tillräckligt för att uppnå det högt ställda beviskravet inom svensk straffrätt, ”utom rimligt tvivel”. Med hjälp av doktrin och praxis kan det konstateras att i vissa fall har domstolen kunnat döma till mord med endast gärningspersonens erkännande som bevis. Ett blankt erkännande kan dock aldrig leda till en fällande dom, erkännandet måste därav på något vis få stöd av övrig utredning. Huruvida det genom praxis finns ett uppställt krav på stödbevisning är omstritt. Ett krav är inte förenligt med den fria bevisvärderingens princip, genom vaga angivelser har dock HD angett att det bör finnas stödjande bevisning som kan styrka muntliga utsagor i grova brottmål.

Följden av att falska erkännanden i vissa fall anses trovärdiga och tillförlitliga gör att oskyldiga människor i dessa fall döms för brott. Den formella rättssäkerheten uppställer krav på förutsägbarhet och legalitet. Dessutom måste det finnas en tilltro till att rättstillämparen tillämpar reglerna på ett korrekt sätt. Att bli dömd efter att ha avgett ett falskt erkännande visar på brister i värderingen av erkännandet, brister som leder till att den formella rättssäkerheten inte kan anses vara uppfylld gentemot den beslutet går emot. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Jonson, Linn LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20181
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
straffrätt, erkännande som bevismedel
language
Swedish
id
8941247
date added to LUP
2018-07-09 16:26:31
date last changed
2018-07-09 16:26:31
@misc{8941247,
  abstract     = {This essay aims to investigate how a confession is used as evaluation of evidence in serious crimes. Courts in Sweden practices the principle of free evaluation of evidence which means that the court shall examine all evidence in the case by optional method. The consequence of this is further on that there are no rules controlling how to evaluate a confession as evidence – a confession can therefore be the basis of the assessment. The evaluation of a confession as evidence is in Swedish courts tested in two steps. At first the court has to make sure that the confession is seriously meant to be a confession, then they have to try if there are any reasons to question the confession. There are many different types of false confessions, the court has to question the confession if they indicate that one of these types may present.

Further on the question if a confession is enough to reach the evidentiary requirement is investigated. In some cases, the court has been able to judge a person with only his or her confession as evidence. The confession has to be supported by other investigation in some way though. It is controversial if there is a demand from court practice saying that the confession has to be supported with other evidence. A demand is not compatible with the principle of free evaluation of evidence. Through vague indications the supreme court of Sweden has anyway stated that there should be some kind of supporting evidence proving a verbal evidence.

The consequence of false confessions in some cases is considered credible and reliable means that innocent people in these cases are convicted for crimes. The formal rule of law imposes a demand of predictability and legality. There also has to be a trust in the application of law and the fact that the rules are applied correctly. To get convicted after giving a false confession shows shortage in the rule of law, shortages which indicates that the formal rule of law can not be considered fulfilled towards the person whom the decision is against.},
  author       = {Jonson, Linn},
  keyword      = {straffrätt,erkännande som bevismedel},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Håller ett erkännande i rätten? - En studie om hur erkännanden behandlas som bevismedel i grova brottmål},
  year         = {2018},
}