Reliability evaluation of a forensic expert's opinion: World practices and Ukrainian realities

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 252-261
Author(s):  
Volodymyr A. Zhuravel ◽  
Violetta E. Konovalova ◽  
Galina K. Avdeyeva
Keyword(s):  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Forensic Analysis ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Modelling And Forecasting

Improving the activities of pre-trial investigation and judicial review largely depends on the increased use of special knowledge in forensic investigative practice and, above all, the involvement of an expert and their analysis. The relevance of the subject matter is explained by the need to introduce new forms and approaches to evaluating the reliability of expert opinions, in particular with the involvement of independent specialists of the corresponding speciality. The purpose of this study was to provide arguments regarding the expediency of attracting knowledgeable persons as reviewers to evaluate the objectivity and completeness of forensic analysis, the correctness of the methods and techniques applied by the expert, and the validity of the opinion. To achieve this purpose, the following general scientific and special research methods were used: Aristotelian, comparative legal, functional, sociological, statistical, system and formal legal analysis, legal modelling, and forecasting. It was established that in the vast majority of countries of the world, except Ukraine, an independent, knowledgeable person with special knowledge in the corresponding field is involved to help evaluate the reliability of an expert opinion. It was proved that contacting knowledgeable persons to evaluate the objectivity, validity, completeness of expert research helps establish the causality between the identified features of the object of analysis and the fact that is subject to establishment, and also gives grounds for determining the affiliation, admissibility, reliability, and sufficiency of the expert opinion. At the same time, a specialist's review cannot serve as a source of evidence, but only has an auxiliary (advisory, technical) nature and can serve as a basis for appointing a second (additional) forensic analysis or a cross-examination of the expert and the reviewer. To exercise the rights of individuals to fair justice, it is proposed to introduce this procedure for evaluating the reliability of expert opinions in Ukraine, with the necessary changes in the current procedural legislation of Ukraine to provide an opportunity for participants in criminal proceedings and the victim to attract knowledgeable persons as reviewers of expert opinions

METHODOLOGY AND OBJECTS OF ASSESSMENT OF THE EXPERT’S OPINION BY THE STATE PROSECUTOR

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 164-169
Author(s):  
ELENA PAVLOVA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Cognitive Process ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
A Charge

Purpose of the study. Consideration of the problems existing in the practice of analysis, assessment and use of expert opinions by public prosecutors, and their causes. The study of the methodology for the implementation of this activity as a combination of:a) theoretical principles and practical methods, research methods that the prosecutor applies to assess the relevance, admissibility, reliability of the expert’s opinion; b) a system of principles and methods for studying the laws in accordance with which the process of this assessment proceeds. The author briefly considers the principles of: a) legality; b) science; c) systemic; d) objectivity included in the set of principles on which the assessment of the expert’s opinion is based. The author proposes the sequence of the prosecutor’s decision to analyze and evaluate the expert’s opinion, considered as the most rational way of this activity. The set of questions clarified in this case is considered both as a task and as a set of objects of assessment. These objects are divided into two groups, depending on the nature of the main issues to be solved; 1) concerning the assessment of the possibility of using one or another expert opinion as evidence of a charge in court; 2) relating to the definition of tactics of their submission to the court and participation in their research. The article provides examples of the use of individual research methods and assessment of expert opinions: comparative legal, analogy, analysis and synthesis. The results of the study . The analysis and assessment of the expert’s opinion is a complex cognitive process that requires legal and special knowledge, practical experience, knowledge of the methodology of this work from prosecutors. Its use in compliance with the principles that it is based on is one of the ways to increase the professional level of public prosecutors.

scholarly journals SPRAWNOŚĆ POSTĘPOWANIA KARNEGO A PRZERWA I ODROCZENIE ROZPRAWY GŁÓWNEJ. ROZWAŻANIA W KONTEKŚCIE OSÓB DOTKNIĘTYCH CHOROBĄ PSYCHICZNĄ LUB UPOŚLEDZENIEM UMYSŁOWYM

Probacja ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 21-30
Author(s):  
Dominika Boniecka -Hakobyan
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Mental Disability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Mentally Disordered ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Common Causes ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Time Required

The purpose of this article is raising the issue of the efficiency of criminal prosecution in case of the continuance, due to mental disorder or mental disability of the defendant. The text corpus includes the overview of the achievements of the doctrine and judicature in the efficiency of the criminal prosecution with the latest amendments. It has been enriched with the exploration of statistics of the Ministry of Justice regarding the number of complaints for excessive length of criminal proceedings in the years 2012-2016, its most common causes, and the observation of the development of its average duration over the years 2011-2018. The analysis has contributed to draw theoretical and practical conclusions. Firstly, it should be noted, that despite for years there have been trying to increase the efficiency of the criminal prosecution, yet still occasionally, there are circumstances extending the duration of the proceedings. Among these, should be recorded the necessity of preparing expert opinions, in the situation when it comes to even a supposition, that one of the parties to the proceedings, is mentally disordered or with a mental disability. Frequently, such an opinion is preceded by observations and research, which explains the extended time of the procedure. Ultimately, that is justified, in terms of quality and possible consequences of confirmed mental illness, mental disability or any other mental disorder. Secondly, the time required for preparing expert opinions, in indicated above cases, makes possible complaints unreasonable. Thirdly, a recess in a trial may turn out to be insufficient to draw an expert opinion, which can lead to an adjournment and may end up with a need to conduct the whole procedure from the beginning. Unfortunately, that is not the only consequence, as when a recess is followed by an adjournment, the prepared during the recess expert’s opinion may not be used in the next proceedings (conducted from the beginning). The author hopes that the above article would be an incentive to reconsider the subject matter through the prism of described issues.

scholarly journals PROBLEMS IN THE EXERCISE OF THE INDEPENDENCE OF JUDGES IN ASSESSING AN EXPERT OPINION IN A CRIMINAL CASE

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4-2) ◽  
pp. 115-129
Author(s):  
Ирек Гизатуллин
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Expert Opinion ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Specialized Knowledge ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
The Status ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
Special Knowledge

The article analyzes some procedural and non-procedural factors that prevent the judge from assessing the expert's opinion in a criminal case freely. The article states that, in the existing law enforcement realities, the expert's opinion acquires the status of an absolute evidence having a pre-determined value. This is due to the de facto lack of competition between the parties in the procedures for appointing and producing an examination, as well as to the difficulty of assessing this type of evidence by a judge in the absence of special knowledge for that. Purpose: to develop theoretical provisions justifying the need to improve the procedures for the appointment and production of expert opinions, as well as the assessment of expert opinions by the court, in order to ensure judicial independence. The paper uses the methods of system analysis, synthesis, sociological polling and generalization. The author concludes that ensuring the freedom of judge’ inner conviction when assessing an expert's opinion directly depends on expanding the possibilities of using an alternative opinion of another person with a specialized knowledge in the same area - the expert's opinion and testimony. In this regard, it is proposed that the law should make it mandatory to grant requests by parties for expert opinions to be admitted and examined in court, and that the results of such research should be reflected in the text of the court decision on the case.

scholarly journals FORENSIC-ECONOMIC EXPERTISE IN PROVING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO COMPULSORY PROOF IN THE INVESTIGATION OF CRIMES IN THE FIELD OF FINANCING SOCIAL TARGETED PROGRAMS

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 403-414
Author(s):  
D. Viter
Keyword(s):  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Economic Research ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Objective Truth ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Correct Definition ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Informal Notes

Traces of criminal activities in the field of financing social targeted programs are often reflected in a number of documents that this activity is issued and accompanied. In this regard, one of the leading places in the investigation of criminal proceedings for such crimes are expert studies on the use of techniques and methods for diagnosing the financial and economic situation of the enterprise. The purpose of the article is to outline the features of forensic economic expertise and to highlight their capabilities in proving circumstances that are subject to mandatory proving when investigating crimes in the field of financing social targeted programs. The article emphasizes that the results of economic research in the form of a conclusion of a forensic expert is one of the sources of evidence in criminal proceedings, which is objective and reflects the correlation relations in the criminal process regarding the establishment of objective truth in a particular criminal proceeding and its solution. essentially. It was noted that the practice of investigation and consideration by the courts of crimes in the field of financing social targeted programs indicates that there are not many cases in which the issues that are addressed by it go beyond the limits of expert knowledge, which indicates the problem of identifying the initiator of examination of the species and subspecies Forensic-economic expertise, the characteristics of the subject and object of this expertise and its subspecies are given. The attention is drawn to the fact that the practical activity of an expert, the limits of his competence in determining the range of issues that he can solve depends on the correct definition of the subject and the object of the examination. It is established that one of the peculiarities of committing crimes in the sphere of financing social targeted programs is that they are committed by officials using multi-combinations and related to the concealment of data in accounting documents. It is proved that all collected valid and fictitious documents, informal notes of materially responsible persons should be attached to the materials of the proceedings; interrogated all persons who can testify about the crime in the sphere of funding social targeted programs, as well as all the expert opinions, the conclusions of which can be used by an expert-economist to provide an expert’s opinion.

scholarly journals Legal discretion in criminal law: general theoretic and branch-wise aspects

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02015
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Nikitin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
General Law ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
Adequate Evaluation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Law Making

Pre-requisites: legal discretion in criminal law just as in other branches has only partially been a subject matter of legal analysis. Predominantly, a law-enforcement type of discretion was studied, which is implemented by law-enforcement authorities during criminal prosecution. However, modern surveys in the field of law theory consider discretion as a general law phenomenon including law-enforcement, law-making, and law-interpretation aspects. This suggests the need to study legal discretion in criminal law from new points of view. Moreover, one should also take into account a dual-aspect nature of legal discretion, e.g., a combination of characteristics of the subject implementing discretion and law-regulated relations where this takes place. The research objective is to define an opportunity of affecting subjects implementing individual types of legal discretion (law-enforcement, law-making, and law-interpretation) intended for optimization of the discretion level in criminal law. Methods: a combination of common, general scientific, specific scientific, and specific legal methods. First of all, the paper uses a systemic and functional approach. Results. Legal discretion in legal law is represented by law-enforcement, law-making, and law-interpretation discretion of respective subjects. These types of discretion are interdependent and indissolubly related. Currently, an integrated approach to studying these types of discretions in legal law is poorly discussed in literature. Meanwhile, only this approach allows for a systematic study of legal discretion limits (in general and for individual types) and for adequate evaluation of their efficiency in criminal law.

Profiler as an expert – selected issues

2017 ◽  
Vol 298 ◽  
pp. 69-75
Author(s):  
Karolina Olszak-Häußler ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Profiling ◽  
Media Attention ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Current State ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
Criminal Profile

Despite the fact that criminal profiling attracts massive media attention, our knowledge about the process of elaborating expert opinions containing criminal profiles is very limited. Based on the literature review, the author attempts to answer the questions: what is the objective of appointing an expert in the field of criminal profiling? and, which criteria should be applied to the evaluation of expert opinion?. Based on the content of the present article, it can be concluded that the current state of knowledge does not allow to determine unequivocally whether the profiler needs special knowledge, nor what should be the scope of such knowledge. Moreover, it cannot be clearly determined, whether the profile provides information of relevance to the resolution of the case. However, there is no doubt that wherever criminal profile takes the form of an expert opinion, it should be subject to very careful control, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and doctrine recommendations regarding this matter.

THE SUBJECT AND TASKS OF FORENSIC AUTOTECHNICAL EXAMINATION

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 198-204
Author(s):  
A. V. Lubentsov
Keyword(s):  
Traffic Safety ◽  
Practical Aspect ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Important Place ◽  
Forensic Examination ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Mutual Relations ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Given

Problems of appointing and conducting forensic examination and using their results in the process of criminal offences investigation occupy an important place in the criminal proceedings and expert activities. A separate category among all these problems is perfection of theoretical basis offorensic examination, namely the definition of a subject and tasks offorensic examination in general and its separate types in particular. One of these is the forensic autotechnical examination, as one of the main expertise scheduled when investigating crimes against traffic safety and transport operation. In the practical aspect in the subject of forensic examination we distinguish procedural and gnoseological sides. The procedural side ofa subject of forensic examination is expressed in a circle of circumstances, which are established by means of special knowledge and are the elements of proofs system. The gnoseological side of a subject of forensic examination is expressed in that the object of cognition at practical expert research are properties of expertise object, its sides and mutual relations which are defined during the given research. On the basis of scientific literature and normative-legal acts analysis the subject and tasks of forensic examination are investigated. A subject and tasks of forensic autotechnical expertise are defined. It’s noticed that in the practical aspect the subject of a forensic examination is considered in wide and narrow senses, as a kind (type) subject of autotechnical examination in general, and a subject of a concrete autotechnical examination in concrete criminal proceedings. It’s specified that depending on it the autotechnical examination tasks are divided on general and concrete. It’s proved that the subject and tasks of a concrete autotechnical examination may coincide on volume with the general or to be them yet however they should not be beyond the general.

scholarly journals Evaluation of forensic computer and technical expertise in criminal proceedings

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (38) ◽  
pp. 204-211
Author(s):  
Mykhailo Klymchuk ◽  
Sergii Marko ◽  
Yevhen Priakhin ◽  
Bohdana Stetsyk ◽  
Andrii Khytra
Keyword(s):  
System Analysis ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Technical Expertise ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Expert Report ◽  
Modeling And Forecasting ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Structural Methods

The purpose of the article is to clarify the place and role of the expert report based on the results of forensic computer and technical expertise as a source of evidence in criminal proceedings. The subject of the study: The subject of research is forensic computer and technical expertise as a source of evidence in criminal proceedings. Methodology: The method of system analysis, formal and logical, system and structural methods, the methods of modeling and forecasting were used in the course of the research were used in the course of the study. The results of the study: According to the results of the study, the authors conclude that forensic computer and technical expertise is the main procedural form of using special knowledge in the area of computer technology, and its results may be the most important part of the evidence base in the specific criminal proceedings. Practical consequences: It is concluded that the use of the expert report based on the results of forensic computer and technical expertise in criminal proceedings is its application by the subjects of evidence during the qualification of criminal offense to establish facts and circumstances relevant to criminal proceedings and subject to proof, as well as to resolve other tactical tasks. Value / originality: The authors’ definition of assessing expert report based on the results of forensic computer and technical expertise is offered.

scholarly journals INTEGRATED CHARACTER OF FORENSIC-EXPERT INVESTIGATIONS IN THE MILITARY SPHERE

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 391-400
Author(s):  
V T. Chuprun
Keyword(s):  
Research Work ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Forensic Research ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Forensic Expert ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Military ◽  
First Time

The presence of the set of unresolved scientific and practical problems in the new field offorensic expertise "Military Research" is determined, and, first of all, it’s a deficit of scientific and methodical provision. The purpose of the paper is to define the comprehensive nature of forensic research in the military sphere. The experience of modern wars and armed conflicts shows that the battle of combined-arms formations acquires the features of land-and-air combat. It’s noted that in today’s combined arms battles and operations, it’s possible to solve successfully the tasks posed only in a complex manner. An analysis of the expert practice of the Kharkiv RIFE shows that during the last period the amount of the forensic military expertise has significantly increased. When conducting investigative activities in this category of criminal proceedings, a number of different issues arise, resolution of which requires special knowledge in various fields of science. In the Kharkiv RIFE there was initiated the performance of research work on the topic "The technique of forensic expert study of the work of commanders (staffs) and military formations in the preparation and realization of combat (service-combat) tasks". The novelty of the work lies in the fact that for the first time an algorithm is developed for determining, from a military point ofview, the compliance ofactions of responsible persons with the established requirements. An opinion was expressed that the subject of any research, including expert, is its immediate performer. In the latter case, it’s only a forensic expert or a person who is procedurally involved in the performance of the examination. The definition of the subject of a forensic military expertise is given. Attention is drawn to the need of availability for the forensic experts and specialists who participate in carrying out forensic military examinations, of the admittance to the information with limited access.

scholarly journals Methods of the Verification of the Expert’s Opinion within Criminal Procedure of Ukraine

2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-86
Author(s):  
Б. В. Шабаровський
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Education And Training ◽  
Legal Representative ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
The Subject ◽  
First Time ◽  
And Training

Considering the fact that the verification of evidence remains poorly researched criminal procedural phenomenon and the expert’s opinion is an important mean of establishing the circumstances of criminal proceedings, the purpose of this study is to distinguish and analyze the methods of verifying the expert’s opinion within criminal procedure of Ukraine. The author has supported the provision that the expert’s opinion has no pre-established force, therefore has to be verified and evaluated. The author has analyzed the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine, as well as the court practice. As the result of the study, the author has provided, for the first time, all methods of verifying the expert’s opinion available to an investigator, a prosecutor, a suspect, an accused (defendant), the person, who is the subject of compulsory measures of medical or educational character application, their defenders and legal representatives, a victim, his representative and legal representative, the civil plaintiff, his representative and legal representative, a civil defendant and his representative, a representative of the legal entity who is the subject of the proceedings. The following methods of verifying the expert’s opinion within criminal procedure of Ukraine have been distinguished: analysis of adherence to the procedure of appointment of the examination and compliance of the expert’s opinion with the requirements of the criminal procedural legislation; comparison of the expert’s opinion with other evidence, including other experts’ opinions; summoning an expert for questioning to clarify his / her conclusion, when the expert is asked by the prosecution and the defense parties, by the victim, the civil plaintiff, the civil defendant, their representatives and legal representatives, the representative of a legal entity which is the subject of the proceedings, as well as the chairman and the judges, and expert’s answers for the questions; simultaneous questioning of two or more experts; the provision of information by the party of criminal proceedings relating to the expert’s knowledge, skills, qualifications, education and training; the appointment of a duplicative or additional examination, in particular by the court’s own initiative.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document