Doctrinal Approaches to Understanding Evidence in a Criminal Case: History and Modernity

Abstract

The paper discusses the main stages of the development of the theory of criminal procedural evidence. The author analyzes and systematizes various approaches of procedural researchers, on the basis of which the basic doctrinal approaches to understanding evidence are distinguished: 1) formal-logical; 2) factual; 3) dualistic; 4) liminal (transitional); 5) synthetic; 6) cybernetic (informational); 6) pragmatic (Anglo-Saxon). The paper defines the causes of their emergence, evaluates their advantages and disadvantages.It is noted that the diversity of approaches to understanding evidence can be explained by the predetermination of various academic approachers and related legislative provisions, initially different ideological ideas and trends that play a priority role in certain periods of society development. At the same time, it is argued that these approaches do not exclude each other, but reveal different elements of criminal procedural evidence as a comprehended, multidimensional complex of cognitive-certifying techniques and argumentative-logical operations: the cybernetic approach as accumulation of useful information; pragmatic approach as its proper certification; formal-logical and factual approaches as justification of law enforcement decisions and positions of the parties, etc.In this regard, the conclusion is formulated about the optimality and the greatest acceptability for the use of another, so-called non-synthetic approach. Evidence is proposed to be understood as information assets provided for by law and predetermined by substantive or ideal traces-displays, subject to accumulation as legally suitable (permissible) information products, and then used as argumentative resources, which support the investigator, inquiror, court in establishing circumstances relevant to the criminal case and substantiating law enforcement decisions., and to the parties in attempts to influence the nature and content of these decisions.