Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Actual problems of Russian law
Reference:

Podvolotskiy, I.N. Interaction between judicial experts and participants of procedural activities, when holding portrait expertise

Abstract: Efficiency of the judicial system of a state depends upon the coordination of the activities of all of the participants of the process. The key element of the interaction may be recognized as the activities of the party initiating a judicial expertise and of a judicial expert. The basis for their interaction is the presence of the complex of special knowledge, allowing them to evaluate the results of each other’s work. The lack of due understanding of the abilities of a specific expert to resolve the problems relevant for proving the case leads to the need to take additional procedural actions, such as interrogation of an expert or assigning an additional expertise. This, in turn, has a negative impact upon the length of the judicial procedures on the case. Solution of this problem may be found in closer cooperation between the experts (specialists) and initiators of an expertise, holding preliminary consultations during which one may clarify the goals of the parties, the type of the expertise, competence of an expert, the list of objects for expertise, information related to assigning this expertise, and the prospective use of its results.


Keywords:

portrait expertise, habitoscopy, special knowledge, forensic studies, interaction, expert opinion, consultation of a specialist, video image, type of expert, object, studies.


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Osnovy sudebnoy ekspertizy. Ch. 1. Obshchaya teoriya. — M.: RFTsSE MYu, 1997. — C. 186.
2. Zinin A.M. K probleme ispol'zovaniya spetsial'nykh znaniy pri provedenii sudebno-por-tretnykh ekspertiz // Sudebnaya ekspertiza: rossiyskiy i mezhdunarodnyy opyt: materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauch.-prakt. konf. — Volgograd: VA MVD Rossii, 2012. — C. 328.
3. Pichugin S.A. Sovremennye problemy kriminalisticheskogo issledovaniya priznakov vnesh-nosti cheloveka // Sovremennye vozmozhnosti kriminalisticheskogo issledovaniya dokumen-tov: Mater. mezhved.nauch.-prakt. konf. 28 maya 2013 g. — M.: Moskovskiy universitet MVD Ros-sii, 2013. — C. 129.
4. Zinin A.M., Roman'ko N.A., Khaziev Sh.N. K voprosu ob utochnenii ponyatiya ob'ektov sudebno-portretnoy ekspertizy // Teoriya i praktika sudebnoy ekspertizy. — ¹2 (26). — 2012. — C. 14–19.
5. Zinin A.M. Osobennosti predstavleniya ob'ektov na sudebno-portretnuyu ekspertizu // Predvaritel'noe sledstvie. — ¹ 1 (11). — 2011. — S. 139–143.
6. Trushchenkov I.V. Sovremennye vozmozhnosti ustanovleniya faktov vneseniya izmeneniy v so-derzhanie tsifrovykh fotosnimkov dlya resheniya zadach ekspertnoy praktiki // Sovremennye vozmozhnosti kriminalisticheskogo issledovaniya dokumentov: mater. mezhved. nauch.-prakt. konf. ot 28 maya 2013 g. — M.: Moskovskiy universitet MVD Rossii, 2013. — C. 123.
7. Dmitriem E.N. Sudebnaya fotografiya: kurs lektsiy. — M.: Yurlitinform, 2010. — C. 37.
8. Artyushenko D.V Problemy rodovoy klassifikatsii sudebnykh ekspertiz // Aktual'nye pro-blemy rossiyskogo prava. — 2011. — ¹ 3. — C. 226–237