The concept of special knowledge forms used during pre-trial investigation is considered. The views of scientists regarding the classification of special knowledge forms used during the investigation ...of criminal proceedings are analyzed. The opinion of the majority of scientists regarding the division of forms of special knowledge into procedural and non-procedural ones is highlighted. In addition, besides procedural and non-procedural forms of special knowledge, the statement on the selection of such a form as mixed, which combines the features of the two forms indicated above, is considered. Another division of special knowledge by forms is also analyzed. Each form of special knowledge is explored in more detail.
Statistical studies of scientists regarding the use of forms of special knowledge in practical activities are presented. Scientific views on conducting forensic examinations in criminal proceedings are analyzed. Peculiarities of appointment of examinations are considered. Aspects of the expediency of using advisory and reference information during the investigation of criminal offenses, in particular theft, are highlighted. The positive consequences of the involvement of specialists in conducting investigative (research) actions as a form of special knowledge are clarified.
The main goals of special knowledge used during the investigation of secret theft of someone else's property are determined. Forms of special knowledge, which are used during the inspection of the scene at the beginning of the pre-trial investigation, are revealed. Judicial practice in criminal cases based on the fact of theft regarding the use of forms of special knowledge during pre-trial investigation is selectively considered. The forms of special knowledge used during the investigation of the secret theft of someone else’s property are analyzed.
The need to involve specialists in inspecting the scene during the investigation of thefts is revealed. It is emphasized that it is mandatory to appoint a commodity expert when investigating the secret theft of someone else’s property. The expediency of involving experts and specialists in the investigative (search) actions carried out during the investigation of the above offenses is analyzed. Attention is paid to consultations and references that can carry important information and influence the receipt of substantive evidence.
This article, based mainly on the jurisprudence of the ECtHR and the Supreme Court of Lithuania, discusses the issues of researching and evaluating expert opinions in national courts. Before starting ...to examine the procedural and material requirements for the assessment of expert opinions in court, the article substantiates the position that in the context of evidence, which is considered in this article, law may not usually be the subject of an expert’s evaluation. Next, the article analyzes the procedural requirements for the evaluation of expert opinions in court, which until now have not been addressed in Lithuanian criminal procedure research. The last part of the article is devoted to the general requirements for evaluating the content of expert opinions (special knowledge) as evidence.
The article considers complexing as a significant trend in the genesis of the institution of special knowledge in criminal proceedings involving minors. The phenomenon under study is defined as the ...combination by one person of two or more procedural functions and/or special knowledge to provide a multilateral assessment of the circumstances important for the criminal case and the individual characteristics of the minor. Four historical stages of the formation of the domestic institution of special knowledge in criminal proceedings involving minors are identified and presented. It is concluded that this institution has gone the way of development from the situational involvement of a few knowledgeable persons through the use of special knowledge by law enforcement officers themselves with the optional involvement of knowledgeable persons to the established practice of producing comprehensive examinations (in which the commission is not a mandatory property) and the active involvement of various knowledgeable persons, in particular, a teacher and a psychologist. Actual situations are considered in which the minority of the participants in the criminal process, along with their individual characteristics (psychophysiological, cultural, religious, linguistic and others), entails the need to combine procedural functions and / or special knowledge. The results of an empirical study conducted by the Author of the article under the guidance of Candidate of Legal Sciences, Docent E. V. Elagina (questionnaire survey of 161 investigators and 116 prosecutors on the involvement of knowledgeable persons in pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases involving minors) are presented; it is shown that in most cases respondents note the leading role of a psychologist in the production of investigative actions with children and adolescents. It is also noted that the functions traditionally implemented by the teacher do not meet the goals of his involvement in the criminal process, and therefore it is necessary to exclude the possibility of such involvement. A general conclusion is made that, when complexing, the first place should be given to special psychological knowledge, since it is psychologists who are competent in assessing a number of phenomena significant for criminal proceedings (for example, emotional and behavioral reactions of minors). The Author proposes a method for optimal integration of procedural functions and / or special knowledge in a criminal process involving minors – the use of special knowledge by a law enforcement officer or the combination of two or more functions by one knowledgeable person. It is shown that the proposed method will reduce the number of persons in contact with a minor and reduce the psychological burden on him.
Статья посвящена исследованию отдельных вопросов участия специалиста при проведении такого распространенного следственного (розыскного) действия, как допрос. Анализируются процессуальные нормы, ...регламентирующие участие специалиста в допросе. Раскрыты проблемные вопросы, связанные с участием специалиста в допросе.
Negative trends in the economy and social relations are slowing down the process of reforming the economic and financial system. The sharp restriction of state control and other negative phenomena ...that existed in our country have caused a significant increase in crime, especially its organized forms, resulting in a sharp increase in the number of particularly serious crimes against the person. A felony such as murder committed by a convict in prison is no exception.
These criminal offenses invariably cause a significant public response, because, firstly, a serious criminal offense is committed, such as murder, secondly, it is committed by convicts serving sentences, and thirdly, as a rule, this category of criminal offenses is committed in correctional facilities.
Convicts are persons with criminal experience who know the peculiarities of law enforcement agencies and have techniques for counteracting the investigation of criminal offenses, so the investigator faces the difficult task of identifying and exposing both the direct perpetrators and organizers (intermediaries) of such murders. That is why it is impossible to search for, record, seize and investigate the criminologically significant information about crimes of this kind necessary for the investigation and the court without the use of various special knowledge.
In addition, the continuous improvement of technical means and methods significantly expands the range of specialized knowledge, which, in turn, allows you to identify, record and remove traces that were previously unavailable for research. However, the problem is that investigators are often not fully informed about the possibilities of using expertise in the investigation of criminal offenses. It should also be borne in mind that murder of this category is committed in a specific situation, namely in correctional facilities. All the above determined the relevance of the chosen research topic.
An effective investigation of any criminal offence is not possible without the use of specialised knowledge. Taking a government official or law enforcement officer as a hostage is no exception; on ...the contrary, from the moment information about the seizure is received, there is a need to engage specialists from various fields of knowledge, including a forensic expert, dog handler, explosives expert, etc. The purpose of the study is to investigate the scientific findings on the definition of the concept of “special knowledge” and to clarify its role in the investigation of criminal proceedings under Article 349 “Taking a government official or law enforcement officer as a hostage” of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. To achieve this goal, the study used the following methods: analysis, synthesis, comparison, critical thinking, and systemic and structural methods, with the aim of conducting a thorough study of theoretical developments, results of investigative and judicial practice, systematising the results and formulating conclusions. It has been argued that one of the ways to improve the efficiency of detection and investigation of crimes is to use specialised knowledge in the activities of law enforcement agencies. In particular, when investigating the taking of a government official or a law enforcement officer as a hostage, special knowledge should be considered as skills and abilities in a particular area which are used in criminal proceedings and contribute to establishing the truth in the case, which contributes to the effective completion of the investigation. As a result of the study, the special knowledge has been classified, namely: by the procedural position of the person who uses it, by the form of expression, by the need to use special knowledge at a certain stage of investigation, by the form of the final result, by the field of knowledge, by the degree of secrecy, by the purpose of use, by the significance of the results obtained. According to the results of a comprehensive analysis, three forms of special knowledge application are proposed in the course of investigation of taking a government official or law enforcement officer as a hostage: specialist involvement in investigative (detective) actions, appointment of forensic examinations and consulting. The role of specialists when involved in conducting typical investigative (detective) actions, such as: inspection of the scene, interrogation and investigative experiment, has been described. An indicative list of specialists who can assist an investigator has been proposed, and the tasks which can be solved through such interaction have been outlined. An indicative list of tasks facilitated by the appointment of forensic examinations has been provided.
PDF
