This paper reviews the history and status quo of evidence theory in China and analyses its gradual shift from a pluralistic evidence law to a model informed by scientific evidence scholarship. It compares fundamental distinctions on evidence and judicial proof between the contemporary evidence theories of China and those in Anglo-American law. The paper reveals that no matter what the evidence system is, the common method of discovering truth plays an important role in the modernization of evidence theory as such theory moves towards a comprehensive evidence scholarship. By shedding light on the theoretical framework of a comprehensive evidence scholarship and the increasing use of scientific ideas in evidence law, our theoretical perspective shows that the framework of a comprehensive evidence scholarship consists of four interdependent and overlapping components.
[Footnote by authors:] The reader should note that the concept of ‘new evidence scholarship’ used in this paper is different from the expression ‘new evidence scholarship’ coined by Richard O. Lempert in his article ‘The New Evidence Scholarship: Analyzing the Process of Proof’ (1986) 66 Boston University Law Review 439.
The dynamic evidence page
It's here: the law of evidence on Spindle Law. See also this post and this post.