scholarly journals Expert Opinion and Witness Testimony as Key Evidence in Criminal Cases on Incitement to Suicide

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 971-979
Author(s):  
Elena Bryanskaya ◽  
Vadzim Samaryn
Keyword(s):  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Objective Assessment ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Timely Initiation ◽  
Assessment Of Evidence ◽  
Court Practice ◽  
Legal Force

For the last five years Belarus and Russia have been among the top five countries for suicide indices. Their rise was caused by the activities of destructive groups in social networks. Experience shows that criminal proceedings for many criminal cases connected with suicides were terminated due to the absence of a crime. Thus, a thorough collection of evidence for this category of criminal cases becomes especially vital. When analyzing the court practice of incitement to suicide, the authors concluded that the most persuasive evidence is expert opinion and witness testimony. Besides, such written documents as medical cards (medical records) of potential suicides have high probative value in the investigation of criminal cases. Timely initiation and conduction of expertise could reveal signs of incitement to suicide, for example, using physical violence against the victim or a staged suicide. As the Criminal Procedure Code sometimes prescribes an expertise for a specific criminal case, such expert opinion will become a key source, a type of evidence that, at the level of a judge’s inner conviction, will have significant legal force when assessed together with other evidence. Thus, it is possible to discuss evidence that has key value, but, at the same time, it should be connected with other information on the criminal case, and together they should make up an integral crime narrative. The European Court of Human Rights introduced a concept of «key evidence» in the practice of criminal proceedings. The analysis of court practice allowed the authors to suggest that key evidence is information that acts as the main fact and is included in the subject matter of the case. This conclusion does not contradict the rule of free assessment of evidence: during such assessment, none of the evidence has predetermined, preconceived legal force. Only when the evidence is harmonized, it is possible to talk about a comprehensive investigation and an objective assessment of evidence.

scholarly journals PERSEPSI KETUA PENGADILAN NEGERI DAN KETUA PENGADILAN AGAMA TENTANG PENINJAUAN KEMBALI (PK) PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO. 34/PUU-XI/2013 DALAM HUKUM ACARA PERDATA

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
BAHRAN BASERI
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Test Material ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Human Needs ◽  
Basic Human Needs ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
Legal Force

Since test material to the provisions of Pasal 268 ayat (3) Undang-Undang No. 8 Tahun 1981on Criminal Proceedings in Mahkamah Konstitusi, Mahkahmah decided in its decision number 34 /PUU-XI / 2013, which states that the provisions was inconsistent with the Undang-Undang Dasar1945, so it does not have binding legal force. Therefore, Peninjauan Kembali (PK) in criminal cases maybe done more than once with the new circumstances or conditions found substantial novum new foundduring previous PK undiscovered. If problems associated PK novum criminal case is considered sub-stantial, and neither should Novum issues related PK in civil cases, as may be after the filing of the PKand disconnected, no new circumstances or substantial novum recently discovered that during theprevious PK undiscovered or if there is a decision of a judges mistake or a real mistake was discoveredafter PK decided. PK is an extraordinary remedy that aims to find justice and truth material. Justice cannot be limited by time or formal provision that limits that PK is only one time. Justice is a very basichuman needs, the more basic human needs of the rule of law. But in civil cases, the results of this studyindicate that the filing PK limited only once.

On the Consideration of a Criminal Case Against a Minor by Jury

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 90-96
Author(s):  
E. V. Markovicheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Case ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Scientific Discussion ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Minor

The functioning of the jury in Russia has demonstrated not only effectiveness, but also a number of problems that need to be resolved. Such problems include the personal jurisdiction of criminal cases by jury. The article reveals the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation regarding the right of minors to trial a criminal case in a jury. The approaches to solving this issue that have developed in the judicial practice of individual foreign states are analyzed, the main directions for further scientific discussion regarding the right of minors to a jury trial are outlined. The purpose of the article is to disclose various approaches to the administration of criminal justice in the relations of minors with the participation of lay judges. The theoretical basis of the study was Russian and foreign scientific works in the field of criminal procedure law, devoted both to the consideration of criminal cases with the jury, and the specifics of juvenile criminal proceedings. Using the comparative legal research method has allowed to reveal various approaches to the access of minors to jury trials in individual states. In Russian legislation and judicial practice the question of the right of minors to have a criminal case against them considered by a jury remains unresolved. The position of the Constitutional Court of Russia regarding the jurisdiction of such criminal cases is also controversial. The experience of foreign countries indicates that there is no universal way to ensure the right of a minor to a proper court. This issue is decided depending on the type of criminal process, the presence or absence of specialized juvenile courts. Any direct borrowing in this regard cannot be considered effective, but a generalization of foreign experience can create the necessary basis for optimizing both the work of the jury and criminal proceedings against minors.

scholarly journals Using Digital Technologies in Criminal Cases in Court: Reality and Prospects

Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 117-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. I. Sheremetev
Keyword(s):  
Video Recording ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Experimental Development ◽  
Automated Information System ◽  
E Mail

The paper deals with topical issues related to the use of digital technologies in criminal proceedings. The author presents the directions of digitization of the court and the principles of using artificial intelligence, formulated by the bodies of the Council of Europe. The stages of the emergence of individual digital technologies first in the work of arbitration courts, and later — courts of general jurisdiction are shown. Existing and promising digital technologies are considered as the criminal case moves, after its submission in court from the Prosecutor. Considerable attention is given to the order of formation of the court for the consideration of a particular criminal case. The author analyzes the difficulties encountered in the use of an automated information system in this matter, and proposes ways to resolve them. The author considers it necessary to use e-mail to call victims, witnesses and other participants in the proceedings, for which he proposes to make appropriate changes to the current procedural legislation. The article reveals the current procedure and prospects for the use of video conferencing systems, audio and video recording of the trial in the criminal process. The author reports on the experimental development of speech recognition programs for participants in the trial. Special attention is given to the achievements in the implementation of digital technologies in the Moscow courts, implemented in the course of the international project «Support for judicial reform». In this regard, the author describes the creation of electronic copies of traditional «paper» cases in the courts of Moscow, making the proceedings more open.

scholarly journals Referring a Case to the Highest Division of the Supreme Court in the Criminal Procedure Legislation of Ukraine and European Countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-165
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uniform Law ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
Court Practice

The article aims to examine one of the elements of the formal mechanism of maintaining court practice unity in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and European countries – referring a case to the highest division of the Supreme Court. Similar to the Ukrainian criminal procedure legislation, the grounds for referring a criminal case and the procedure of its application are provided in the legislation of Estonia, Italy and Lithuania. At the same time, the Ukrainian legislator has established a number of special features, however, the wording of the relevant articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine is not perfect. The article provides answers to such questions as how forceful the provisions of criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine are, to what extent of effectiveness the Supreme Court exercises its legal authority regarding the unity of court practice in criminal proceedings, and whether the controversies in legal positions of the structural divisions of the Supreme Court have been successfully avoided. In order to achieve the stated aims, parts 2 and 3 are devoted to the examination of the grounds for referring a case in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and European countries. Part 4 outlines the shortcomings of the content of some articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine concerning the procedure of the referral of a criminal case to the highest division of the Supreme Court. Part 5 provides the analysis of the validity of decisions made by the boards of judges at the Supreme Court on the referral of criminal proceedings to its higher judicial divisions – the joint chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. On the basis of the study of the judgements of boards, the judicial chambers of the Criminal Cassation Court and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, in part 6 the question is answered on whether the Supreme Court of Ukraine managed to perform its duty on the assurance of court practice unity in such an area as criminal proceedings. Keywords: exclusive legal problem, development of law, formation of uniform law enforcement practice, the Supreme Court, criminal proceedings, Ukraine.

scholarly journals FEATURES OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF PRIVATE PROSECUTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 875-880
Author(s):  
E.F. Tensina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Procedural Rights

The article reveals the nature of the claim of a private prosecution, which establishes the freedom to dispose of material and procedural rights. The forms of manifestation of dispositive principles in the material and procedural aspects in the course of criminal proceedings are determined. Taking into account the nature of the claim of a private prosecution, various models of proceedings in criminal cases of a private prosecution and the peculiarities of the implementation of the provisions of the criminal procedure principle of the presumption of innocence are considered. The author critically assesses the legal constructions that allow the application of a special procedure for making a court decision in criminal proceedings of a private prosecution if the accused agrees with the charge brought. In particular, taking into account the provisions of the principle of the presumption of innocence, it is concluded that it is inadmissible to apply Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation when considering a criminal case of a private prosecution if it is initiated by filing an application directly with a magistrate in the manner prescribed by Art. 318 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation or when investigating a criminal case of this category in the form of an abbreviated inquiry, regulated by Ch. 32.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

Fundamentals of the evidentiary process in the light of judicial practice in criminal cases

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Bryanskaya ◽  
Anna Altunina
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice

The monograph gives an idea of the process of proof in a criminal case. The process of proof is the driving force behind all criminal proceedings. In this regard, issues related to the concept, types and nature of evidence, their recognition as inadmissible, and their argumentative power are considered. The article presents the material that reveals the stages of the proof process. It is addressed to students, undergraduates, postgraduates, researchers and practitioners specializing in criminal evidence.

scholarly journals Verbalisan Witness Position as Evidence of a Criminal Case

Ius Poenale ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-86
Author(s):  
M. Kemal Pasha Zahrie
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Justice Practice

The presence of Constitutional Court Decision Number 65/PUUVIII/2010 expands the meaning of witnesses in Article 1 point 26 of the KUHAP, resulting in the emergence of various interpretations in criminal justice practice concerning the position of verbal witness testimony as evidence. Juridically, the decision creates problems considering that the Criminal Procedure Code or Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) does not recognize verbal witnesses' testimony as evidence. This study examined the position and the strength of verbal witnesses' testimony as evidence in criminal proceedings. After gathering all the data using normative and empirical juridical research, this paper concludes that the testimony of verbal witnesses is grouped in the evidence of guidance in Article 188 Paragraph (1) of the KUHAP because the testimony of verbal witnesses is not primary evidence. After all, its existence is contingent on the judge's willingness to employ it. The strength of proof of testimony of verbal witnesses is that they must satisfy the elements of Article 188 paragraph (1) of the KUHAP, namely the information referred to in the form of events or circumstances concerning a criminal act, as well as conformity with other evidence, as required by Article 188 paragraph (2) of the KUHAP.

scholarly journals Institute of Returning a Criminal Case to the Prosecutor in the System of Criminally-Remedial Means, Ensuring the Victim's Right to Protection from Crime and Access to Justice

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 512-526
Author(s):  
Tatyana Ryabinina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process

The article deals with current and controversial issue in the criminal science, specifically the need for the Russian criminal justice process to have an institute to return a criminal case to the procurator at the stage of appointment and preparation of the court hearing. The author emphasizes that during the continuance of RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure, a special emphasis was put on it as a guarantee of the delivery of justice and the rights of the participants in the proceedings, that put in place the arrangements necessary for an effective court trial. The goal of modern judicial reform is to establish an independent judiciary whose main function is the delivery of justice which can be implemented in criminal proceedings only in adversary criminal proceedings. Since the beginning of its implementation, attitudes towards the institution of returning a criminal case by a court to a procurator to correct lacunae, loopholes, contradictions, irregularities or flaws in pre-trial proceedings have changed dramatically. It is perceived as an attribute of the courts prosecutorial activities, which is inconsistent with its new role as an independent body to resolve legal disputes between a state and an individual awaiting for a founded and equitable decision from the court. Despite critical rhetoric towards the institution of returning the criminal case to the prosecutor, the author argues that it is necessary due to specific status of the first judicial phase in a staged system of Russian criminal justice process. This institute creates conditions for monitoring and verification activities of judges at this stage, and the corresponding authority of judges to determine the future course of criminal cases brought before the courts. However, the author concludes that the task of rectifying the shortcomings of the prosecution can be addressed at the preliminary hearing introduced by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to resolve various contentious issues. When it is impossible to remove the obstacles that prevent the court from conducting a trial, the judge may, taking into account the views of the parties, decide to return the case to the prosecutor.

THE USE OF WITNESS TESTIMONY IN PROOF OF CRIMINAL CASES

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 692-696
Author(s):  
T.A. Shmareva ◽  
A.I. Shmarev
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
New Evidence

The article considers the problems associated with the use in proving the testimony of persons with a transforming criminal procedural status. A concrete example of the use of witness testimony in proving a criminal case is described, the process of establishing the truth in which was complicated by the opposition of the defense. During the court session, the prosecution's witness withdrew from the testimony he had given at the preliminary investigation stage, explaining this by the pressure exerted on him by the investigator, which fully satisfied the defense. Thanks to the creative approach and activity of the prosecution, it was possible to obtain new evidence, which allowed not only to expose the witness in giving knowingly false testimony in court, but also to convince the court of the guilt of the defendant, in whose favor the witness changed his testimony.

Bail as a Preventive Measure: Some Problems and Ways to Improve Effectiveness

2021 ◽  
pp. 62-65
Author(s):  
Aleksey I. Tsyretorov ◽  
◽  
Andrey G. Anisimov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Activity ◽  
Significant Problem ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
State Revenue ◽  
Justice Restoration

The bail serves to reduce the likelihood of the situation when the suspect or the accused flees from inquiry, preliminary investigation or trial, continues the criminal activity; threatens a witness and (or) other participants in criminal proceedings, destroys evidence, or otherwise obstructs a criminal case proceedings. Drawing on the structure of crimes committed in Russia, with more than half being property crimes such as theft and fraud, choosing bail as a preventive measure, if possible, seems to be a logical and apparently popular measure due to several circumstances. Most of the mercenary crimes are motivated by the illegal acquisition of property or money. Consequently, bail as a restraint measure affects the lucrative motivation of the suspect or the accused and is often adequate to the damage caused. A significant problem of social justice restoration in most criminal cases is the compensation for damage or harm, which in most cases is measured in monetary and property terms. In this case, the bail could become a real mechanism for compensation for such harm, because money or property in the case of bail is already available at the time of the trial and could be used to compensate for the harm caused. However, in reality, such compensation is not used. The conversion of bail to state revenue in case of violation by the accused or suspect of obligations related to the bail does not contribute to the solution of this problem.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document