Abstract
This article examines the issue of the procedure and forms of use of specialized knowledge in criminal proceedings. It is noted that the main tools of cognitive activities for the investigation of criminal offenses are investigative (search) actions aimed at finding traces of a criminal offense, their research and the formation of court evidence. An analysis of the opinions of scientists regarding the evolution of forms of using special knowledge in criminal justice at different historical stages was carried out. Attention is drawn to the gradual expansion of the forms of use of specialized knowledge which is being enshrined in the current criminal procedure legislation. The author analyzes the scientific studies which reveal the essence of special knowledge, its importance for establishing the circumstances of a criminal offense, the subjects who can use special knowledge, and the procedural documents which record the process of application of special knowledge and its evidentiary value. The author compares the requirements which must be met by a person involved in criminal proceedings as a specialist and an expert. The author shows significant differences in the requirements for these participants to criminal proceedings. On this basis, it is proved that a specialist’s opinion may be consistent with an expert’s opinion, provided that all other requirements are the same. Since the qualification requirements for a person who has special knowledge in a certain field and is involved in criminal proceedings as a specialist and an expert are different, and the regulatory procedure for their involvement in criminal proceedings is different, it is considered impossible to put an equal sign between the specialist’s opinion and the expert’s opinion as a proven source of evidence. The author substantiates the proposal to change Part 3 of Article 214 of the CPC of Ukraine and to restate it in the following wording: “In order to clarify the circumstances of a criminal offense, prior to entering information into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations, it may be 3) an expert opinion may be obtained...” and so on. This will contribute to the formation of reliable and high-quality evidence in criminal misdemeanor proceedings
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.