There are two kinds of investigators as witnesses in the exclusionary procedure of illegally obtained evidence,written testimonies and appearing in court as witnesses. In theory,it is more important for investigators to be witnesses at court. Through the analysis of the related legislation,legislators have positive attitude towards inves-tigators appearing in court as witnesses. But through the analysis of the 108 published judgment documents in the website puklaw. cn,the conclusions can be summarized as follows,firstly,there is,the investigators as witnesses, about the one - third exclusionary case of illegally obtained evidence;secondly,the usage of the written testimonies is higher than appearing in court as witnesses. Under the present circumstances,the investigators in the court have little effect on the court. This paper further analyzes the reasons of few investigators appearing in court as witnesses. The result is that prosecutors,defenses and judges have negative attitude towards investigators appearing in court as witnesses. That is for their position in the criminal procedure to decide.%在非法证据排除程序中侦查人员作证方式有两种：一为书面作证；二为出庭作证。理论上侦查人员出庭作证更具有当然性。相关立法规定表明立法者对侦查人员出庭作证的诉讼价值是持积极肯定的态度。然而对北大法宝中公开的108份裁判文书的分析发现只有接近三成的排除非法证据案件有侦查人员作证；书面证言适用率高于出庭作证；在现有情况下，侦查人员出庭对采信证据影响不大。进一步分析发现侦查人员出庭作证受限的原因是控、辩、审三方对侦查人员出庭作证都持消极态度，这是由他们在刑事诉讼中的地位决定的。
展开▼
