Блог

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.10

P. Antoniuk, Ye. Svoboda, T. Mykhalchuk

The article analyzes the essence of a specialist’s conclusion as a result of the use of special knowledge in the pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses in order to determine his/her procedural consistency as a source of evidence in the investigation of criminal offenses. The results of the analysis substantiate the position regarding the inconsistency of the established procedure for obtaining and verifying the specialist’s conclusion as a source of evidence to the criteria that are presented with evidence in criminal proceedings. The authors conclude that it is advisable to perceive the expert’s conclusion as the only possible result of the use of special knowledge, which can act as a source of evidence in the investigation of both criminal offenses and crimes as well.

Key words: criminal proceedings, procedural sources of evidence, special knowledge, specialist, specialist’s conclusion, expert conclusion

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.09

O. Sadchenko

The article defines the need to create a terminological base for the theory and practice of forensic examination. It is analyzed methodological approaches to the definitions of the terms “feature”, “property”. Based on the analysis of scientific approaches, the concepts of “feature” of an object and “property” of an object have been formed. It is proposed to classify “properties” into specific, group and general. There are given expediency and legitimacy of the differentiation of the terms “feature” and “property” in the theory of forensic examination. The author’s position on the differentiation of these concepts is proposed.
The author proposes to investigate the structure of objects to clarify the nature of the “properties” and “features” of objects of forensic examination. In order to clarify the nature of “properties” and “features” of objects of forensics, directly, how they are established and what its value is in expert knowledge.
The peculiarities of the method of establishing “features” and “properties” of objects of objects of forensic examination that consists of sequential practical and mental operations, stages, stages of expert knowledge, have been investigated.

Key words: forensic examination, identification, features of objects, properties of objects, structure of objects, elements of objects, expert knowledge, expert research.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.08

P. Bilenchuk V. Koloniuk M. Malii

It is outlined conceptual foundations for the systematization, creation and use of means of knowledge and evidence in the field of justice, legal proceedings, and law enforcement and human rights activities. The theoretical, methodological, systemological and praxeological features of the development and implementation of the newest means of knowledge and evidence in the activities of the judiciary are considered. The expediency of using traditional and creating new means of knowledge and proof, which should be introduced into the sphere of justice, legal proceedings, law enforcement and human rights activities, is shown. The attention is focused on the latest trends in scientific research in the field of information and analytical activities, cybernetics, informatics, electronic law, cyber criminalistics, cyberexpertology, combinatorial analysis, no methods, grid and block chain technologies. The worldview approaches to understanding the system of means of knowledge and proof and their use in the professional legal activity of the judiciary have been formulated. The system of the latest means of cognition and proof is considered for the purpose of multivariate analysis and optimization of the administration of justice by choosing specific tasks – AKSS, ASBDL – MMR1, PRIAM, AWP – investigator.

Key words: evidence, optimization of justice, electronic law, cyber forensics, scientific support of knowledge in the field of justice

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.07

B. Leonov V. Serоgin

The article is devoted to the development of methodological support for forensic expert activity. Based on the analysis of previous scientific studies, the directions of improving expert methods and evaluating its effectiveness are proposed.
In the context of the methodology of scientific knowledge, the authors analyzes promising directions for improving expert techniques through standardization and algorithmization, based on the methods of formalizing scientific research.
The article substantiates the basics of the formation of algorithms of specific expert methods, as well as an example of constructing an algorithm for solving typical problems during the forensic examination of special technical means that are used for receiving of the information not officially.
Based on the results of the analysis of the foundations of the formation of algorithms and the principles of their construction, the introduction of algorithms of expert methodologies is proposed, which allows improving the expert method at the stage of its development.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.06

Julija Liodorova, Irina Voronova, Ruta Shneidere

The aim of the article is to study forensic accounting methods to detect fraud in financial statements. A taxonomy of forensic analytics methods is proposed and a generalization of seven mathematical models for detecting fraud recommended by forensic accounting experts and practitioners is provided, allowing for the detection of fraudulent financial statements before it is too late. The authors’ qualitative analysis of evaluating fraud detection models is based on data from semi-structured interviews conducted in the focus group of forensic accountants, investigators, and prosecutors.

Key words: forensic accounting, forensic method, fraud in financial statements, models

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.05

M. Shcherbakovskyi

The article shows that despite the different legal systems of the United States and Ukraine, in the field of forensic science there is a common problem associated with the assessment of the scientific reliability of expert research and on this basis the admissibility of expert testimony. The existing Fry standard, Dober’s trilogy, Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of proof aimed at determining the admissibility of expert testimony are considered.

It was stressed that the main criterion for the admissibility of expert testimony in the American proceedings was the scientific and methodological credibility of the research conducted. The validation is entrusted to the judge who performs the role of “goalkeeper”.

If the previous check confirms the scientific validity of the expert research carried out, the judge “admits” the expert’s conclusions to a judge of fact to make a decision on the case. Verification of the scientific reliability of an expert’s testimony requires the judge to familiarize himself with the fundamentals and methods of the relevant sciences.

Comparison of the standards of admissibility of expert research in the American proceedings with the domestic criminal procedural doctrine shows certain coincidences and differences. A significant difference between American standards is a clear prescription for judges to check and establish those properties of an expert study that determine the admissibility (scientific reliability) of an expert’s testimony.

Based on the analysis of American standards, it was concluded that it is advisable in the Ukrainian procedural legislation of attaching to the subjects carrying out proof, when assessing the reliability of the conclusion and testimony of an expert.  The obligation to check the scientific (the presence of general scientific provisions, theoretical foundations of a certain type of examination) and methodological (the use of a certified methodology registered in Register of expert research methods) reliability of expert research results.

Key words: forensic examination, expert testimony, admissibility, reliability, standards of USA, criminal procedure of Ukraine.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2020.66.04

V. Khakhanovskyi

The article deals with the issue of the legality and correctness of the use in forensics, in the process of investigating criminal offenses of a number of concepts and terms that have recently formed in the process of integrating scientific knowledge, namely: “electronic evidence”, “digital evidence”, “evidence in electronic form”, “electronic displays”, “virtual evidence”.  Its common and differences are analyzed, the author’s position on the need to differentiate these concepts is revealed, proposals are made to improve the legal regulation of such concepts and terms, as well as to conduct further scientific research in this area, including at the dissertation level.

Keywords: integration of scientific knowledge, evidence, factual data, evidential information, forensic information, forensic informatics, electronic evidence, digital evidence, evidence in electronic form, electronic displays, documents, virtual evidence

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2020.66.03

N. Nestor

The article deals with the procedural aspects of the proper conduct of a forensic examination within the framework of court proceedings, its legal regulation on existing legislation of Ukraine.
It is noted that in the conditions of expanding the procedural capabilities of the participants in the process, shortcomings in the legal regulation of legal proceedings, the passivity of the court, the absence of actual equality of the parties and the traditions of competition, a favorable situation is created for the abuse of procedural rights, including when appointing and conducting a forensic examination, as well as when using its results in the course of the trial. The consequence of such actions distorts the essence of justice, since the participants in the process use the judicial protection mechanism to violate the rights and legitimate interests of others. Such abuses create problems in the development of an effective model of expert justice provision.
The article describes the abuses of procedural rights that are allowed by the participants in the trial when appointing and conducting forensic examination, as well as using its results, reveals the legal means of counteracting such abuses. Based on the analysis of the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine and examples of judicial practice in recent years on the application of fines and other sanctions to participants who have abused their procedural rights in order to prevent an objective forensic examination, proposals are made to improve the relevant regulatory framework.
It is concluded that combating the abuse of procedural rights in the appointment and conduct of forensic examination, as well as the use of its results in court proceedings has become an urgent need in the context of optimizing the judicial system and achieving its procedural goal. The legislation already has some groundwork for solving this problem, but practice still shows that there are regulatory gaps that the judiciary is trying to address at the recommendation level.

Key words: examination, expert, expert institution, special knowledge, forensic examination, abuse of procedural rights.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.02

O. Kataraga P. P. Petkovich V. Prisecaru

The article deals with the practical aspects of accreditation of different areas of forensic expert activity, that allow creating an effective mechanism that will help move to a new level of forensic technology. The authors consider the structure of a specific integrated module of the management system in a forensic institution, provides an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages in terms of the development, implementation, disposal of such systems during accreditation. In conclusion, the authors share their proposals for improving the assessment by the accreditation bodies in connection with the above mentioned.

Key words: accreditation of expert laboratories, forensic expert activity, integrated management system, international standard.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2021.66.01

V. Tishchenko L. Belik О. Samoilenko Yu. Tishchenko

The article is devoted to the study of aspects of the essence and legal nature of forensic examination in criminal proceedings.
It is analyzed the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On Forensic Examination”.
The norms of the Criminal Procedure Code concerning the grounds for the appointment and conduct of forensic examination have been investigated.
It has been established that many scientists in the field of civil procedural law, criminal procedural law, criminology and forensic examination paid attention to the legal content of the forensic examination.
The nature of occurrence of forensic examination has been investigated.
It has been established that at the legislative level, the term “forensic expert activity” is used only in the Law of Ukraine “On Forensic Examination”.
In the specified normative legal act there is no clear definition of this concept, scientists through the analysis of some norms of law reveal its content.
Regarding the definition of the concept of forensic examination, it has been established that there is no consensus in legal science.
Regarding the definition of the concept of forensic examination, it has been established that there is no consensus in legal science.
The article analyzes the criminal procedure form of appointing a forensic examination.

Key words: forensic examination, criminal proceedings, forensic expert activity, forensic expertology, criminal procedural form.