scholarly journals FORMS OF SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE USE

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 240-248
Author(s):  
H. O. Spitsyna ◽  
H. S. Bidniak
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
Search Problem ◽  
Knowledge Use ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Opinion Analysis ◽  
Crime Investigation ◽  
3D Scanners ◽  
Special Knowledge

The article deals with problematic issues regarding the forms of special knowledge use while crime investigation, legislative acts are analyzed. Based on the opinion analysis of criminalistic scientists, forms of special knowledge use divided according to different criteria into procedural and non-procedural, direct and indirect, basic and optional are detailed. The most commonly used forms are indicated, among them: appointment of forensic examinations, involvement of specialist for performing investigative actions, consulting and reference, auditing and monitoring of records, the presence of an investigator during an examination, expert questioning. Legislation changes concerning of examination by a Forensic science institution (expert) only according to the investigating judge decision or court made on the petition of one of the parties to criminal proceedings are analyzed. Positive reform aspects, as well as the argument about the loss of procedural independence of the investigator while decision making under such circumstances were highlighted; it was suggested to review the above changes. Taking into account legislation changes, the role of the specialist during the search relatively of mandatory fixation of this act by means of audio and video recording is indicated. Proposals are offered on the use of several cameras, the use of quadcopters, 3D scanners to capture of the important points for proving of the search. Problem issues existing in the units of criminalistic support during investigative actions are outlined and the mechanism of their solution is proposed. Attention is focused on the use of automated records and prospects for their development.

scholarly journals Use of special knowledge in the detection and investigation of serious crime

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-190
Author(s):  
Serhiy Obshalov
Keyword(s):  
Significant Role ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Technical Developments ◽  
Serious Crime ◽  
Preparatory Stage ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
Forensic Scientists ◽  
Professional Assistance ◽  
Or Team

The research highlights current aspects of the institute of special knowledge in the detection and investigation of felonies. Based on a thorough analysis of the views of prominent forensic scientists, based on current legislation, the concepts of special knowledge, forms and types of their use. Given the different professional competencies, the concept of special knowledge of an expert and a specialist is considered separately. Among the typical forms of use of special knowledge, attention is focused on those that are essential for the investigation of serious crimes, adhering to their classification into procedural and non-procedural. It is emphasized that one form of use of special knowledge passes into another, in particular, after forensic examinations, an audit is performed. Appointment and conduct of forensic examinations are covered depending on the type of serious crime (mercenary-violent, economic, etc.). Attention is paid to the choice of expert institution, the sequence of appointment and conduct of comprehensive forensic examinations. Some issues of specialist participation in the conduct of investigative (search) actions and measures of criminal proceedings are considered. The need for professional assistance during the inspection, search, investigative experiment, temporary access to things and documents at the preparatory stage, to record the progress of the investigative action, to work with traces and other evidence, during the evaluation of the results of the investigative action. The involvement of a psychologist as a consultant or specialist to compile a search psychological portrait of a criminal is considered. The significant role of departmental inspections in the investigation of serious crimes in the economic and financial spheres has been noted. Attention is paid to the expediency of involving a group or «team» of various specialists to participate in investigative (search) actions, the use of innovative technical developments for forensic purposes. Examples of practical activities and interview data of practical staff are given.

scholarly journals DEVELOPMENT DIRECTIONS OF THE SPECIAL JUDICIAL PROCEDURE

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1(63)) ◽  
pp. 134-139
Author(s):  
Илья Степанович ДИКАРЕВ
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Dialectical Method ◽  
Methodological Basis ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
Written Materials

The complicated application of the special judicial procedure significantly reduces the procedural savings achieved in criminal proceedings. In this regard, the question arises of compliance with modern realities of the complicated procedure for decision-making on the application of the considered form of court proceedings. Purpose: to develop proposals for improving the criminal procedure legislation in order to make it possible to simplify the application of the special judicial procedure. Methods: the author uses the methods of analysis, synthesis, legal interpretation as well as systemic and logo-legal methods; the methodological basis of the research is a dialectical method. Results: it is reasonable to conclude that the change in the role of the court in proving when applying the special judicial procedure, expressed in imposing on it the obligation independently, on the basis of written materials of the case and some judicial investigative actions, to establish the factual circumstances of the criminal case, will simplify the procedure for applying the considered procedural form by refusing to agree with the representatives of the prosecution.   

Expert as a scientific judge: we return to the discussion of a forgotten problem

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (4) ◽  
pp. 132-141
Author(s):  
Sergey Rossinskiy
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Training And Education ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Understanding

In this article, the author continues his series of publications devoted to the problems of evidence in pre-trial proceedings in a criminal case. The article considers one of the most controversial procedural ways to establish circumstances that are important for a criminal case – judicial examination. Draws attention to a serious procedural feature of an expert, reminding not so much the rights of participants of criminal proceedings considered in Chapter 8 (Criminal procedure code) of the Russian Federation, as the jurisdictional powers of the bodies of preliminary investigation and trial. The author believes that the opportunity given to the expert to assess the actual quality of the research objects and their total adequacy to formulate certain conclusions compare him to a scientific judge. The author examines in detail the reasons that encouraged the scientists to abandon the idea of an expert as a scientific judge, and comes to the conclusion that they are wrong and farfetched. This allows us to think about changes in the doctrinal and legislative approaches to the role of an expert as a subject of evidence in criminal proceedings, namely, the prospects for granting him the authority to establish certain factual circumstances through the use of special knowledge. At the same time, attention is drawn to the fact that the proposed innovations will inevitably require undamentally different approaches to the training of judicial experts, to their training and education as highly professional subjects with an appro-priate level of legal awareness, legal understanding and responsibility for the results of research and conclusions.

scholarly journals Researching the Process of Using Special Knowledge in Criminal Activities as a Condition for the Objectivity of the Cognition and Qualification of Criminal Realitys Manifestations

2021 ◽  
pp. 41-49
Author(s):  
Sergey Zhuravlev
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Specialized Knowledge ◽  
Crime Investigation ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
Cognitive Activities ◽  
Tactical Decisions ◽  
Working Out

The author researches the process of using special knowledge in criminal activities while taking into account the contents of the object of criminalistics, and the essence of the criminalistic culture of law enforcement. Examples are presented to illustrate the features of using specialized knowledge in the criminal sphere. The author analyzes the conditions for defining the role of a concrete person, acting as a specialist, in preparing and committing a crime. The specific features of the theoretical platform of criminal law sciences are singled out. Priorities in the classification and qualification spheres of criminal law knowledge are established. The author draws attention to the identification, prediction and diagnostic essence of criminal knowledge and describes the connection between the nature of a lawyer’s cognitive activities and the qualification boundaries of criminal law actions. It is noted that the process of cognizing the criminal reality is dialectic. The author shows the primacy of the substantive understanding of the act of crime while taking into account the criminal law and procedure benchmarks for working out methodological and tactical decisions in the process of crime investigation.

PROBLEMS OF THE LEGAL REGULATION OF SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE USE OPERATIVE UNITS OF SECURITY SERVICE OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 69-76
Author(s):  
V. A. Fastovets
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Knowledge Use ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Search Activity ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Scientific Technical ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
Operative Activity

The problematic issues of using scientific, technical, natural and other special knowledge in criminal proceedings for the purpose of revealing, disclosure and investigation of crimes for a long time were always paid with considerable attention as from practical employees, and scientific workers. The actuality of this thematic range is conditioned by constant technical progress, updating ofa technical number ofscientific, criminalistic and other means which are used during revealing, formalizing and seizure of crime traces, by appearance of new types of expert researches, change of special knowledge forms use in criminal legal proceedings and by many other factors. There was pointed out to the lacks ofa legal regulation in the applicable legislation regarding participation of knowledgeable persons in operative-search activity. According to the results of the analysis performed, the author ascertains the absence of such regulation at the level of normative-legal acts defining legal bases for the separate law enforcement bodies activity (except for the National anticorruption bureau of Ukraine), and the normative-legal acts regulating separate kinds of activity of their operative units. In its turn, the similar state of matters can call into question legality of use of the received results ofsuch activity as proofs in the criminal proceedings. The research of scientific works ofprocessionalists established the absence of the uniform approach to the decision of the specified problematic questions. The paper also studies the level of legal regulation of special knowledge use for achievement of the operative activity goals in the post-Soviet territory countries, in particular, in Republic of Kazakhstan, Republic of Turkmenistan, Republic of Belarus, the Kyrghyz Republic and some other, and there is drawn a conclusion about the presence of the corresponding norms in the legislation of these countries. Taking into account stated, the author proves necessity of formalizing similar provisions in the corresponding normative-legal acts of Ukraine.

Elaborating the role of reflection and individual differences in the study of folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Behavioral Responses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Economic Beliefs

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.

The Role of Shared Decision-Making in Audiologic Rehabilitation

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Pryce ◽  
Amanda Hall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behavior Changes ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Treatment Information ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Potential Risks ◽  
Audiologic Rehabilitation

Shared decision-making (SDM), a component of patient-centered care, is the process in which the clinician and patient both participate in decision-making about treatment; information is shared between the parties and both agree with the decision. Shared decision-making is appropriate for health care conditions in which there is more than one evidence-based treatment or management option that have different benefits and risks. The patient's involvement ensures that the decisions regarding treatment are sensitive to the patient's values and preferences. Audiologic rehabilitation requires substantial behavior changes on the part of patients and includes benefits to their communication as well as compromises and potential risks. This article identifies the importance of shared decision-making in audiologic rehabilitation and the changes required to implement it effectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document