摘要： 通过对“排除合理怀疑”纳入《刑事诉讼法》前后共40件案件的对比分析，可以发现“排除合理怀疑”的引入对证明标准的实践运作带来一些积极变化，使法官对证据的主观分析和判断“可以言说”；更有利于防止错案；也使证明标准的适用更为合理化。但同时“排除合理怀疑”的适用也存在一些问题，如部分法官对于“排除合理怀疑”的理解有偏差；“排除合理怀疑”适用的随意性较大；并且其适用缺乏实质性。为进一步发挥“排除合理怀疑”的实效，可从证据法和程序法方面采取若干措施，使其成为可适用性更强的证明标准。首先，应从法解释学角度对“排除合理怀疑”进行具体化阐释，以便于司法人员理解和适用；其次，应加强证明标准判断中的证据推理和说理要求；再次，应继续推进庭审实质化改革，通过实质化的庭审而发现和排除“合理怀疑”。

关键词: 排除合理怀疑, 证明标准, 实证研究

Abstract: Through comparative analysis of 40 cases before and after the amendment of Criminal Procedure Law, we can find that the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt bring some positive change to proof standard, which makes judge's subjective analysis and judgement openable, and be in more favor of prevent misjudged cases.However, this standard still has some practical problems, that is, some judges misunderstand the exact meaning of it, and it's application breadth and depth is insufficient, or even has some arbitrariness. To improve the application effect of it, some measures should be taken from the perspective of procedural and evidence law.First, the exact meaning of beyond a reasonable doubt should be explained through rechtsdogmatik to make it easy for  judicial officials.Second, the ability of reasoning bared on evidence should be enhanced.At last, the reform of substantial trial should be pushed forward.

Key words: Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, Proof Standard, Empirical Study