Yu. Foris; V. Koloniuk
The model of the modern approach to the classification of forensic examinations can be designated as two sets with a section of the intersection. From the point of view of the system approach, the classification of forensic examinations should look like a collection of sets where «A» includes «B», and «B» includes «B» as a subtask of the task. Thus, the solution of the problem «B» indirectly affects the solution of the problem «A» through the solution of the problem «B». However, the solution of the tasks of different classes of forensic examinations are not connected with each other, unless this is a complex examination, which is the area of their intersection. The same statement is true for kinds, species, subspecies of forensic examinations on the basis of the current classification (type of special knowledge). It is quite sufficient to divide them into species and subspecies (as underexplored species), with their areas of intersection with each other in the form of complex forensic examinations. It is quite sufficient to divide them into species and subspecies (as underexplored species), with their areas of intersection with each other in the form of complex forensic examinations. «Forensic expert knowledge of the circumstances of the past event, drawn into the orbit of justice, is based on the reflection of this event in various material tracks, which bear the new legally meaningful information. Therefore, material traces of reflection (very different in its origin) are the central link between the past event that is being established, and caused the emergence of a trace, and based on expert knowledge based on special knowledge» – wrote M. Sehai.
«This circumstance predetermined both the grounds and directions of developing the conceptual foundations of the expert methodology: the creation of the most universal cognitive model for the formation of trace-reflections, and, after its design, on the same type of blocks of such tracks, combined into interdisciplinary expert doctrines. As the key universal cognitive model that reveals with the greatest visibility the “general picture» of the trace formation, the paradigm of the links of the interaction of trace-forming systems is chosen, and all the variety of trace-reflections in accordance with the nature of the objects being displayed and the trace-reflections themselves, bearing the information on the facts, are united into three interdisciplinary doctrines: expert substratology, expert documentation and expert psychology». In conclusion, it should be mentioned the merits of M. Sehai in the forensic expert community precisely in that it rarely finds its implementation: in scientific synthesis.