scholarly journals Development of forensic tactics at the stage of mature science

2021 ◽  
pp. 96-1000
Author(s):  
Yu. Myroshnychenko
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
History Of ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Tactical Decisions ◽  
Protection Of Participants

The article completes a series of works devoted to the study of the history of forensic tactics. The author’s vision of periodization of formation and development of this section of science is given. It is concluded that the trends of the current stage of development of forensic tactics are determined by radical changes in the evidence paradigm, based on the competitive ideology of the reformed criminal process. This poses a number of urgent tasks for scientists and practitioners, including improving the tactics of interrogation, inspection, search, presentation for identification, and the development of methods for conducting new investigative actions for our judiciary, such as simultaneous interrogation of two or more persons, investigative experiment. The whole spectrum of covert (investigative) investigative actions – an institution also still unknown to the domestic criminal process – is in dire need of tactical and forensic support. The need to substantiate the expediency of expanding the cognitive boundaries of forensic tactics, extending its recommendations to the field of criminal proceedings is becoming more and more tangible. It is necessary to continue developing the theory of court situations, tactical decisions, tactics of judicial interrogation and other procedural actions. The problems of planning court proceedings, in particular in the aspect of ensuring the continuity of court proceedings, remain relevant and require further research on the basis of the provisions of the current legislation. The specific activities of the investigating judge require completely new tactical developments. There is an urgent need to develop tactical recommendations on the means of ensuring criminal proceedings, overcoming the opposition to pretrial investigation and trial of criminal cases, protection of participants in criminal proceedings. Extremely important from the standpoint of current trends in criminal justice is the development of tactical and forensic recommendations to ensure judicial proceedings on the basis of procedural agreements and other special procedures of criminal proceedings (simplified, special, etc.).

scholarly journals Basic principles of construction of methodical of criminalistic support judicial proceedings.

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-289
Author(s):  
Yuriy Miroshnichenko
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Progressive Movement ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Scientific Substantiation ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Principle Of Legality

The article is devoted to the formation of key principles of construction of methodical criminalistic recommendations and their complexes, designed to optimize court proceedings, including: – the principle of legality, which means full and accurate compliance with the algorithms for resolving criminalistic situations, which are formed at the stage of court proceedings, the content of current legislation, ethical norms and moral principles; – the principle of theoretical validity and practical applicability, which requires a strong scientific substantiation and proven in practice the effectiveness of the proposed odical recommendations, which take into account both positive experience and errors and shortcomings in the work of judges in criminal cases; – the principle of specificity, which provides the reality of tactical recommendations for working with evidence, the completeness and effectiveness of the developed algorithms, the certainty and accuracy of their content and its compliance with modern judicial practice, objectivity and typicality of situations faced by subjects of criminalistic activity on stage of court proceedings; – the principle of promptness, which means the optimal combination of procedural and criminalistic tools in order to achieve the overall goal of criminal proceedings and aims to develop the methodical criminalistic complexes to ensure the optimal pace of litigation, when the least time achieves the greatest effect of procedural activities; – the principle of planning (phasing), which requires that all processes, actions, operations in court proceedings, carried out on a planned basis, ensuring its progressive movement towards the strategic goal of criminal proceedings, which requires differentiation of methodical algorithms developed by criminalistics in accordance with successive stages of court proceedings; – the principle of situationality (situational conditionality), which is the priority of creating algorithms for resolving typical situations that arise at the relevant stages of the proceedings and are characteristic of all or most criminal cases, regardless of the criminal qualification of the event under investigation.

scholarly journals BASIC MODEL OF SEPARATE METHODIC OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS: TASKS, CONTENT, STRUCTURE

2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 164-170
Author(s):  
Yuriy Myroshnychenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Main Task ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Basic Model ◽  
Judicial Investigation ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Procedure

The article is devoted to the problem of building a basic model of methodic judicial procedure, which in its content should disclose the activities of the court at all stages of the judicial system, give recommendations on the choice of its directions, procedural actions, use of the most appropriate means of influencing specific court situations complexes of procedural actions and tactics of their carrying out at various stages of judicial proceedings. The basic model of judicial methodical criminalistics complex may have the following structure: a) characteristic of the proceedings of a certain type, including the purpose, objectives and directions of judicial investigation; b) typical court situations that correspond to a certain stage of court proceedings; c) typical systems (algorithms) of procedural actions and criminalistics means of influencing judicial situations in order to implement the tactical tasks stipulated by them. The main task of building a basic model methodic of judicial procedure is to study it from a criminalistics standpoint and develop on the basis of knowledge (identified patterns) practical recommendations for decisions and actions of the court in typical situations of the general judicial procedure. Among the tasks of creating a basic judicial methodic can also include: 1) substantiation of the system of judicial proceedings; 2) selection of typical court situations in relation to each of its stages with the disclosure of the main activities of the court to resolve them; 3) development of generalized tactics of procedural actions, characteristic for each stage of court proceedings; 4) identification of the main forms of counteraction to criminal proceedings and development of ways to minimize its negative consequences. Along with the presence of general patterns of legal proceedings, on which the basic model of judicial methodics is based, it is legitimate to assume the presence of a number of features inherent in certain types of legal proceedings and criminal cases classified according to other criteria. Tier сriminalistic support of requires the development of separate scientific-methodical complexes of a lesser degree of generalization.

Using Specialized Knowledge in Assessing the Reliability of Testimony in Criminal Proceedings: a Retrospective, Doctrinal and Practical Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 165-196
Author(s):  
E. V. Noskova ◽  
◽  
J. A. Putintseva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
History Of ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
Psychological Knowledge

Introduction. The history of the formation and development of forensic examination as an independent type of criminal procedural activity is long and very ambiguous. The patterns of its occurrence and stages of development predetermine the importance of expertology for modern law enforcement practice. The emergence and active use of new branches of scientific knowledge determine their introduction and influence on criminal proceedings, which is clearly demonstrated by the example of psychology. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The theoretical basis of the work is the scientific developments of domestic and foreign researchers devoted to the study of the possibilities and problems of using special psychological knowledge in assessing the reliability of testimony obtained in the course of pre-trial and judicial proceedings in a criminal case. Research methods – systemic, historical, logical, comparative and hermeneutic. Results. Without psychological and pedagogical special knowledge, it is impossible to imagine modern proceedings in the vast majority of criminal cases involving minors. The article provides a retrospective analysis of the application of non-legal knowledge to reveal lies in the testimony of witnesses, systematizes the experience of modern Russian law enforcement investigative and judicial practice, examines the arguments given in scientific sources and court decisions on the use of special psychological knowledge to substantiate and assess the reliability of the testimony of participants in criminal proceedings.The work examines the current capabilities of psychology and their potential for proving in the course of criminal proceedings, cites the positions of scientists who previously studied the studied complex of material and procedural problems. Discussion and Conclusion. On the basis of the available empirical experience, the author’s conclusion is formulated about the advisability of practical use in the process of proving psychological research of a teacher-psychologist aimed at identifying psychological signs of the reliability and/or unreliability of information reported by participants in criminal proceedings, especially in the process of forming a sequence and in the course of proving, formulating investigative versions, as well as in order to substantiate the conclusions of the investigator and the court with the testimony of an expert, a specialist who conducted the corresponding study. In connection with the identified problems, the necessity of preparing explanations at the departmental level of the significance and procedure for using special psychological knowledge in criminal proceedings is substantiated.

scholarly journals Metamorphoses of an Adversarial Nature of Criminal Proceedings in Cases of Judicial Review

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 44-62
Author(s):  
S. V. Burmagin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Interested Party ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Subject

An adversarial nature of any judicial proceedings, which is characteristic of justice and corresponds to its nature, is revealed in criminal proceedings not only in criminal cases, but also in so called cases of judicial review exercised during pre-trial proceedings. In the present paper the features of adversarial construction of judicial review proceedings in the Russian criminal process are investigated in the context of the purpose and subject of judicial review at pre-trial stages. The author has analyzed the specifics of the conflict relationship, the essence of the legal dispute and the subject composition of the procedural parties in cases of judicial review, as well as the peculiarities of initiating the judicial review proceedings and distribution of the burden of proof between the parties; reveals the transformation of the procedural roles of the main participants of the adversarial proceedings when the disputed issue is transfered from the main proceedings in the criminal case for consideration in the procedure of judicial review within the framework of separate proceedings. The paper also elucidates such features characteristic for certain forms of judicial review as involvement of third parties having their own interest in the judicial review case and restriction of participation in the court session of the interested party. The paper focuses on the problem of ambiguous (from the standpoint of the principle of adversariality) procedural status of the prosecutor in judicial and review proceedings in which independent parties are the investigator and (or) the head of the investigative body. Alternative options for elimination of the problem discussed above are proposed. It is concluded that in the course of normative regulation of judicial review procedures and law enforcement, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of cases of judicial review and the originality of manifestation of adversarial foundation in such cases.

CONCERNING THE STRUCTURE OF PUBLIC LEGAL INTEREST IN CRIMINAL COURT PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-30
Author(s):  
Алексей Викторович Дашин ◽  
Петр Михайлович Малин ◽  
Алексей Васильевич Пивень
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
Legitimate Interest ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Constituent Elements

В статье анализируется структура публичного законного интереса в уголовном судопроизводстве, входящих в него элементов на примере института домашнего ареста. Авторская модель публичного законного интереса участников уголовного процесса «привязана» к стадийности и может распространяться не только на вопросы, связанные с мерами пресечения. По мнению авторов, публичный законный интерес в контексте рассматриваемой проблемы воплощается в жизнь на основе нормативно установленного действия, содержащего конкретно сформулированные правила, устанавливающие четко определенные права и обязанности участников правоотношений. Данная деятельность сопряжена с определенными этапами (стадиями), которые в той или иной степени характерны соответствующей мере пресечения, и возможна в той стадии, где осуществляется оценка действий, предпринятых должностным лицом, осуществляющим производство по уголовному делу. Реализация публичного законного интереса, заявленного следователем, дознавателем на избрание домашнего ареста, зависит от того, как соответствующие устремления оценят другие должностные лица - руководитель следственного органа, прокурор (не обладающие правами реализации публичного законного интереса), то есть от их усмотрения. Законодатель не предоставляет следователю, дознавателю возможность «непосредственно» обратиться в суд - участнику процесса, наделенному правом реализовать их устремление на избрание меры пресечения. Подобные «преграды» не предусмотрены в законе для иных участников уголовного процесса, не наделенных публичной властью и стремящихся реализовать свой законный интерес. The article analyzes the structure of public legitimate interest in criminal proceedings, its constituent elements on the example of the institution of house arrest. The author's model of the public legitimate interest of participants in the criminal process is «tied» to the stage and can extend not only to issues related to preventive measures. According to the authors, public legitimate interest in the context of the problem under consideration is brought to life on the basis of a normatively established action containing specifically formulated rules establishing clearly defined rights and obligations of participants in legal relations. This activity is associated with certain phases (stages) that are more or less characteristic of the corresponding measure of restraint, and is possible at the stage where the actions taken by the official conducting the criminal proceedings are evaluated. The realization of the public legitimate interest declared by the investigator, the investigating officer for the election of house arrest depends on how the relevant intentions will be evaluated by other officials - the head of the investigative body, the prosecutor (who do not have the rights to realize the public legitimate interest), i.e. on their discretion. The legislator does not give the investigator, the inquirer the opportunity to turn «directly» to the court - a participant in the process, entitled to realize their intentions for the election of measures of restrain. Such «barriers» are not provided in the law for other participants in the criminal process who are not endowed with public authority and who seek to realize their legitimate interest.

scholarly journals Peculiarities of implementation of the principle of legality in the criminal process of Ukraine

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 253-257
Author(s):  
Oleksiy Skryabin ◽  
Dmytro Sanakoiev
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Limiting Factor ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Principle Of Legality ◽  
Discretionary Powers

The article analyzes the principles of criminal procedure, which are the expression of the prevailing political and legal ideas of the state, relate to the tasks and methods of judicial proceedings in criminal proceedings, are enshrined in law and operate throughout all stages and necessarily in its central stage. Modern theoretical ideas about the system of principles of criminal proceedings are still in the stage of active methodological and ideological rethinking. Discussions continue both on the concept and features of the principles of criminal proceedings, their system, and on the peculiarities of implementation at different stages of the criminal process. Violation of the principles of criminal procedure is a sign of illegality of decisions in the criminal and becomes the basis for the cancellation of these decisions. The principle of legality characterizes the legal regime of strict and mandatory observance of laws in law enforcement practice, which manifests itself in criminal proceedings, limits the discretionary powers of the pre-trial investigation, prosecutor's office and court. The principle of legality becomes an opportunity to transfer criminal proceedings from one procedural stage to another only on the basis of the law and in a strictly defined sequence. Legality is one of the guarantees of establishing the truth in a criminal case, which ensures the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms. The principle of legality is characterized by mandatory observance of laws in criminal proceedings, is a limiting factor in the discretion of the pre-trial investigation, prosecution and court. Due to the implementation of the principle of legality, the shortcomings and gaps in the criminal process that exist in criminal procedural law can be overcome.

Execution of a Sentence in the Structure of Criminal Proceedings: Procedural Stage or Special Court Proceedings?

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 97-106
Author(s):  
V. V. Nikolyuk ◽  
◽  
L. A. Pupysheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Self In Relation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Proceedings

The article analyzes the concept of execution of a sentence as an independent stage of the criminal process (the stage of criminal proceedings). Arguments are given that point to its certain illogicality and inconsistency. The authors on the basis of existing legislation and taking into account the positions of Plenum of the Supreme Court additionally reasoned and substantiated the thesis of the existence of the criminal process self in relation to a criminal case of criminal procedure, regulated by Chapter 47 of the Code of criminal procedure.

scholarly journals TACTICAL COMPONENTS OF THE PROSECUTOR’S ACTIONS TO CONCLUDE A PLEA AGREEMENT FOR THE ACCUSED

2021 ◽  
pp. 243-257
Author(s):  
I. Kohutych
Keyword(s):  
Media Coverage ◽  
Situational Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Support Provision ◽  
Negotiation Tactics ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Effective Use ◽  
Constituent Elements

The article is devoted to the study of certain tactical aspects of the he prosecutor’s participation in the conclusion of an agreement on the confession of guilt by the accused. It is concluded that it is necessary to develop a system of forensic recommendations regarding the provision of this direction of the prosecutor’s activity in court proceedings. It is stated that the institution of criminal procedure has appeared in Ukraine based on agreements, that is, a mechanism with separate contractual (compromise) elements during the resolution of criminal legal conflicts, which belongs to the so-called special orders of criminal proceedings. It is noted that, in contrast to the sufficient attention of scientists to the issues of procedural regulation of criminal proceedings based on agreements, the tactical aspects of the activities of the prosecutor almost get out of sight of scientific research, which is in no way consistent with modern challenges of combating crime. It has been established that the activities of the prosecutor to conclude an agreement on the confession of guilt by the accused and his/her judicial approval are cognitive and organizationally diverse, requiring appropriate tactical support (provision). This support will be a new direction of tactical and forensic support of the so-called compromise procedures in criminal proceedings. It should contain recommendations, at least regarding localization of an unproductive conflict between the prosecution and the accused, as well as unpredictable compromises between other participants in criminal proceedings. It should contain recommendations the availability of adequate ways to convince the accused of the futility of his/her opposition to the prosecutor and the court and the need to cooperate with them based on feedback, taking into account the specifics of professional defense and a situational analysis of one or another variant of defense tactics. In the context of the prosecutor’s activities to conclude an agreement on the plea of the accused, the most relevant is the so-called negotiation tactics. In the mainstream of the analyzed subject, it would be more expedient to call it the tactics of prosecutorial persuasion and ensuring compromise procedures in the criminal process. Its constituent elements are a system of recommendations regarding the organizational, informational and resource-personnel support of the prosecutor’s activities to conclude an agreement on the plea of the accused in order to a) make it impossible for the relevant participants in the criminal process to formally treat their duties; b) prevent unpredictable compromises between the defense and the victim, as well as prosecution witnesses; c) promote exclusively objective media coverage of the real state of affairs (in conditions of journalistic interest in a specific compromise procedure). At least, this will already become the basis for the effective use of tactics of creating conditions for the preparation and direct conclusion of an agreement on the plea of the accused.

scholarly journals Criminal legal basis for an expedited trial procedure provided by the chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-208
Author(s):  
A. V. Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Court Proceedings

The subject of study is the criminal-legal basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling when the accused person agrees with the charge. These issues are relevant, since in July 2020 the substantive legal basis of the expedited procedure in Russia was changed and now this procedure can only be applied in criminal cases of small and medium gravity.The aim of this work is to study the substantive legal basis of an expedited procedure of litigation from the point of view of the changes were made to it. The author expresses the thesis that the legislators did not quite reasonably link criminal-legal grounds of the expedited procedure with the system of categories of crimes.The methodology. The author used general scientific methods (dialectical, historical, methods of formal logic, system analysis) as well as method of formal legal interpretation of Russian Criminal Code and judicial decisions of Russian courts.The main results, scope of application. The criminal and legal basis of certain criminal procedure is a package of criminal law standards, for the implementation of which a certain criminal and procedural form is intended. The parameters of the substantive basis of criminal proceedings are set with the signs that shall be indicated in the Code of Criminal Procedure and may change. It directly refers to the expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling, by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code. Initially, it was assumed that the application of this procedure is permissible in criminal cases concerning crimes the punishment for which does not exceed 5 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code. The expedited court proceedings began to be applied in criminal cases concerning crimes, the punishment for which does not exceed 10 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code, since 2003. The Russian Supreme Court made an attempt to reduce the application of court proceedings provided by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code in 2019. It turned out to be successful. Legislators have changed the basic criterion that determines the substantive basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling. Now the system of categories of crimes is this basis. The system of categories of crimes presented in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is not stable enough and is based on a set of provisions of this Code, but the sanctions for many crimes are not scientifically and practically grounded in this Code. In addition, the classification of crimes enshrined in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is based on such a criterion as the nature and degree of public danger of the crime. These categories are among the most complex in the science of criminal law.Conclusions. The use of categories of crimes as a criterion for determining the criminal legal basis of the expedited procedure for making a court decision significantly complicates the application of the expedited procedure.

scholarly journals Przedstawiciel społeczny w transparentnym procesie karnym

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (0) ◽  
pp. 21-37
Author(s):  
Paweł Czarnecki
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Public ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Community Organisation ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights

The article analyses the rights and duties of a social representative in criminal proceedings (article 90 Code of Criminal Procedure). Participation in court proceedings may be declared, before the commencement of judicial examination, by a representative of a community organisation, if there is a need to defend a social interest or an important individual interest within the statutory purposes of such an organisation, especially in matters pertaining to the protection of human rights and freedoms. The representative of a community organisation who has been admitted to participate in court proceedings may participate in the trial, express their points of view and make statements in writing. The court shall admit a representative of a community organisation if it finds this to be in the interests of justice. This person shall not be allowed to ask questions to person questioned by the court, he has no right to make a complaint with the court, can`t submit motions for evidence and are not entitled to participate in a session or in an investigation. The author emphasizes the importance of participation by the citizenry in the administration of justice principle and the right to a fair and public hearing of his case. In article they were also discussed old draft bills in the position of social representative in criminal cases, and in particular the advantages and disadvantages of amending article 90 c.c.p. Amendment of 10 June 2016. The author argues that the changing of position will not increase the participation of the public in the proceedings, because the legislature did not admit procedural rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document