Clarification and optimization of the proof of the amount of financial loss in wire and internet fraud crimes
Discussions regarding the comprehensive determination of the amount of financial loss caused by wire and internet fraud and evidence collection through sampling are fundamentally a debate on whether the evidence derived from these methods are presumptive evidence.The misunderstanding of these methods is caused by the impact of the ambiguity of the concept of presumption and the habitual thought of corroboration.According to the standard of proof,comprehensive determination is indirect proof.Based on the substantive function of sampling,samples should be collected at measured intervals,in order to enhance the judge's discretion.The exception in the regulations on sampling evidence collection concerns the distribution of the burden of proof,instead of the burden's transfer.The defendant's proof should meet the standard of"raising a reasonable doubt".In order to avoid potential judicial risk of ambiguous adjudication of the amount of financial loss,it is imperative to enhance the system guarantees for the defendant's proof.
CybercrimeAmount of financial loss caused by a crimePresumptionStandard of proofBurden of proof
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
