Skip to main content Skills Marketplace Descubra e explore skills de IA criadas pela comunidade.
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Mostrar detalhes do prompt Um comando direto ignora o prompt de revisão. Verifique a origem antes de executá-lo.
npx skills add https://github.com/ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open --skill evidence-authenticity-reviewO comando permanece em uma só linha. Role horizontalmente para revisá-lo antes de copiar.
Prefere uma cópia local? Baixe os arquivos disponíveis atualmente no SkillsMP.
Baixar Zip Baixando... Mais deste repositório fetching-arbitration-rules Use when retrieving arbitration institutional rules (ICC, LCIA, SCC, SIAC, HKIAC, VIAC, МКАС/МАК при ТПП України, UNCITRAL) — fetching current version, verifying redaction applicable to the date of arbitration agreement, constructing URLs for official rule texts
determining-pl-request-regime Use when choosing the Polish legal regime for letters, requests, applications, complaints, petitions, public-information requests, KPA filings, PPSA complaints, RODO access requests, registry extracts, court-file access, tax/ZUS/cudzoziemcy/USC procedures, or professional lawyer letters. Prevents mixing UDIP, KPA, PPSA, RODO, registry, special-procedure, and advocate/radca letter regimes.
applying-new-york-convention Use when preparing applications for recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Poland, applications for setting aside arbitral awards under KPC art. 1205–1211, or opposing such applications — mapping Article V of the 1958 New York Convention to art. 1214–1215 of the Polish KPC, identifying grounds for refusal, structuring public policy arguments
Ocupações relacionadas SOC
Baseado na classificação ocupacional SOC
name evidence-authenticity-review title 证据真实性审查技能 description 用于审查证据真实性的执行技能。真实性是证据"三性"的基础，本技能提供书证、物证、电子数据、证人证言等各类证据的实质性审查方法，包括来源审查、载体审查、内容审查和对比审查等。适用于诉讼准备、证据质证阶段。 author sungaoxiang-backend author_url https://github.com/sungaoxiang-backend/intelligent-evidence-platform/tree/main/skills/evidence-authenticity-review license MIT version 0.1.0 execution_mode open jurisdiction cn practice litigation language zh
证据真实性审查技能
Overview
本技能提供一套系统化的证据真实性审查方法，涵盖书证、物证、电子数据、证人证言等各类证据类型的审查要点，帮助律师准确判断证据是否真实可靠，为质证提供有力依据。
Background
根据《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第八十七条，人民法院对单一证据审核认定的第一项即是"证据是否为原件、原物"。真实性是证据的"地基"，地基不牢，地动山摇。证据真实性审查分为形式审查（快速筛查）和实质审查（深度解剖）两个层次。
Action
审查证据真实性
根据证据类型，采用相应的审查方法。
审查框架
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 证据真实性审查框架 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
输入：证据
│
▼
┌─────────────────────┐
│ 第一步：形式审查 │
│ 核对原件/完整性 │
└──────────┬──────────┘
│
┌──────────┴──────────┐
│ │
有明显问题 通过初审
│ │
▼ ▼
┌──────────┐ ┌─────────────────────┐
│排除证据 │ │ 第二步：实质审查 │
└──────────┘ │ (来源/载体/内容/对比)│
└──────────┬──────────┘
│
┌───────────┼───────────┐
│ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼
来源审查 载体审查 内容/对比审查
按证据类型的审查要点
1. 书证审查
审查项 审查方法 瑕疵表现 原件核对 触摸印章凹凸感，检查纸张新旧 彩印冒充原件，纸张过于白净 笔迹鉴定 起笔、行笔、收笔特征分析 笔画抖动、不自然的断连 印章鉴定 印文形态、边框线条、微观瑕疵 印文边缘有锯齿、拼接痕迹 内容一致性 与已知事实对比验证 出现未启用地名、矛盾表述
2. 电子数据审查
审查项 审查方法 瑕疵表现 元数据分析 创建时间、修改时间、设备信息 修改时间晚于声称形成时间 完整性验证 哈希值比对、数字签名验证 数据被篡改、不完整 来源追踪 发送者身份、传输路径 冒名发送、转发篡改 公证保全 检查公证书、时间戳 未经公证的易逝数据
3. 证人证言审查
感知能力 位置、光线、角度、视力条件 位置偏远、光线昏暗仍称看清 记忆情况 时间间隔、是否受干扰 证词前后矛盾、受媒体影响 利害关系 亲属、朋友、雇佣关系 存在利益关联或情感倾向 陈述一致性 与其他证据交叉印证 独自无佐证、与实物证据矛盾
审查项 审查方法 瑕疵表现 原物核实 与记录描述对比 复制品与原物不符 保存状态 检查保存环境、链条 保管不善、污染损毁 专业鉴定 成分分析、痕迹鉴定 鉴定条件不具备
Parameters {
"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#" ,
"title" : "Evidence Authenticity Review" ,
"type" : "object" ,
"properties" : {
"evidence_type" : {
"type" : "string" ,
"enum" : [ "document" , "digital" , "testimony" , "object" , "audio_visual" ] ,
"description" : "证据类型"
} ,
"has_original" : {
"type" : "boolean" ,
"description" : "是否有原件"
} ,
"provided_by" : {
"type" : "string" ,
"enum" : [ "party" , "third_party" , "court" ] ,
"description" : "证据提供方"
} ,
"review_focus" : {
"type" : "array" ,
"items" : {
"type" : "string" ,
"enum" : [ "source" , "carrier" , "content" , "comparison" , "metadata" ]
} ,
"description" : "审查重点"
} ,
"party_position" : {
"type" : "string" ,
"description" : "己方当事人立场（原告/被告）"
}
} ,
"required" : [ "evidence_type" , "has_original" ]
}
Output Schema {
"authenticity_review" : {
"overall_assessment" : {
"authenticity" : "verified|questionable|unverified" ,
"confidence" : "high|medium|low" ,
"recommendation" : "accept|challenge|exclude"
} ,
"detailed_findings" : {
"original_check" : "passed|failed|not_applicable" ,
"carrier_analysis" : "详细发现" ,
"content_analysis" : "内容真实性评估" ,
"comparison_result" : "与其他证据对比结果"
} ,
"challenge_points" : [
"可质疑的具体问题点"
] ,
"cross_examination_suggestions" : [
"质证意见建议"
]
}
}
Legal Guardrails
无原件的证据，真实性存疑，可不予认可
电子证据易被篡改，需验证元数据和完整性
证人证言主观性强，需交叉询问验证
书证需注意是否为套打、空白盖章后添加内容
对己方不利证据：严格审查真实性，发现问题坚决不认
对己方有利证据：提前核实原件，避免庭上被动
对案外人出具证据：可认可形式真实但不认内容真实
真实性质证意见应基于客观审查结果
不得恶意质疑真实证据损害诚信
庭前应让委托人确认签字印章真实性
Metadata 属性 值 logic_origin《诉讼律师证据工作实战指引》《各类证据的真实性审查要点》《实务技能质证技巧》 evolution_value系统化真实性审查方法，避免虚假证据被采信，保护当事人权益 execution_context诉前证据审查、庭审质证阶段
Test Cases
测试用例 1：书证真实性审查（有原件） {
"evidence_type" : "document" ,
"has_original" : true ,
"provided_by" : "party" ,
"review_focus" : [ "source" , "carrier" , "content" ] ,
"party_position" : "被告"
}
{
"authenticity_review" : {
"overall_assessment" : {
"authenticity" : "questionable" ,
"confidence" : "medium" ,
"recommendation" : "challenge"
} ,
"detailed_findings" : {
"original_check" : "passed" ,
"carrier_analysis" : "纸张过于白净，声称签订于三年前但纸张崭新，存在伪造嫌疑" ,
"content_analysis" : "合同中出现了五年前才启用的新地名，内容真实性存疑" ,
"comparison_result" : "与双方其他交易习惯存在不一致"
} ,
"challenge_points" : [
"纸张形成时间与声称签订时间不符" ,
"内容包含时代错误信息" ,
"建议申请笔迹和印章鉴定"
] ,
"cross_examination_suggestions" : [
"对该证据的真实性不予认可" ,
"纸张过于白净，与声称形成时间严重不符" ,
"内容中出现的地名在声称签订时并不存在" ,
"申请对笔迹、印章形成时间进行司法鉴定"
]
}
}
测试用例 2：电子数据审查（微信聊天记录） {
"evidence_type" : "digital" ,
"has_original" : false ,
"provided_by" : "party" ,
"review_focus" : [ "metadata" , "source" , "content" ] ,
"party_position" : "原告"
}
{
"authenticity_review" : {
"overall_assessment" : {
"authenticity" : "unverified" ,
"confidence" : "low" ,
"recommendation" : "challenge"
} ,
"detailed_findings" : {
"original_check" : "failed" ,
"carrier_analysis" : "未提供原始载体，仅有截图，无法验证完整性" ,
"content_analysis" : "截图存在编辑痕迹，部分内容模糊不清" ,
"comparison_result" : "与对方当事人陈述存在重大矛盾"
} ,
"challenge_points" : [
"未提供原始载体，仅提供截图" ,
"截图可能经过编辑、删减" ,
"无法验证电子数据的完整性和真实性"
] ,
"cross_examination_suggestions" : [
"该证据没有原件，对真实性无法核实，故对真实性不予认可" ,
"根据《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第十五条，电子数据应当提供原件" ,
"请法庭责令对方提供原始载体或经过公证的电子数据"
]
}
}
测试用例 3：证人证言审查 {
"evidence_type" : "testimony" ,
"has_original" : true ,
"provided_by" : "witness" ,
"review_focus" : [ "source" , "content" , "comparison" ] ,
"party_position" : "被告"
}
{
"authenticity_review" : {
"overall_assessment" : {
"authenticity" : "questionable" ,
"confidence" : "medium" ,
"recommendation" : "challenge"
} ,
"detailed_findings" : {
"original_check" : "passed" ,
"carrier_analysis" : "证人与原告系多年好友关系" ,
"content_analysis" : "证人声称在昏暗光线下清晰辨认被告面孔，违背常理" ,
"comparison_result" : "证言与监控视频记录存在矛盾"
} ,
"challenge_points" : [
"证人与原告存在利害关系" ,
"感知条件不足（光线昏暗）" ,
"证言与客观证据（监控）矛盾"
] ,
"cross_examination_suggestions" : [
"证人与原告系多年好友关系，存在利害关系" ,
"证人作证时光线条件不足，不可能清晰辨认" ,
"证言内容与监控视频记录相互矛盾" ,
"建议法庭对该证人证言的证明力不予采信"
]
}
}
Related Skills
evidence-cross-examination: 庭审质证技巧（三性完整质证）evidence-admissibility-check: 证据可采性综合判断evidence-list-compilation: 证据清单一览表制作evidence-review-methodology: 证据审查四法则 