摘要： 公检法机关在非法言词证据解释上的冲突是一个不断演化的过程。通过引入芝加哥学派的管辖权冲突理论，可以对作为刑事司法系统中行动主体的公检法三机关在不同阶段对非法言词证据作出的不同解释进行清晰地描摹。对非法言词证据排除规则作出客观化的解释从某种意义上来说是非常困难的。在解释的过程中，语词的含义更多地取决于利益的逻辑而非语词本身的逻辑。不同机构各自的利益关注、权力格局、冤假错案带来的舆论环境、政治大环境等一系列因素都会对非法言词证据的解释产生不同程度的影响。

关键词: 非法言词证据, 解释, 管辖权冲突, 定界, 错案

Abstract: The different interpretations on illegal oral evidence among Ministry of Public Security\\SPC\\SPP were shaped in a progressive process.By the theory of jurisdictional conflict from Chicago Scholarship, we can describe the basic standpoints of these three institutions in their interpretations in different time.We find that it is difficult to interpret illegal oral evidence objectively.In the process of interpretation, the meaning of words often depended on the logic of interest but not that of words.Many extraneous and uncontrolled factors, such as interests of institutions, wrong conviction and public opinions, political circumstances, power pattern among different institutions and so on, would affect deeply the interpretations of illegal oral evidence.

Key words: Illegal Oral Evidence, Interpretation, Jurisdictional Conflict, Boundary work, Wrong Conviction